home

CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed toddler

By Last Night in Little Rock, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Tue Jul 12, 2005 at 10:29:24 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by Last Night in Little Rock

Sunday evening, the LAPD SWAT team encountered a man with a gun who was allegedly using his 19 month old child as a human shield. According to the LAPD spokesman, the gunman fired on the officers and they fired back killing both the gunman and the child. CNN.com carried video of the story since yesterday along with its story here.

Bratton said the fatal shooting was only the second time a hostage had been killed since the department formed its SWAT team in 1967. In that time, SWAT officers have responded to 3,800 calls involving hostages or people barricaded inside buildings.

It was the second time in nine months that Los Angeles officers have fired on an assailant holding a hostage. In November, police shot a man who held a pregnant woman by the neck outside the Mexican Consulate. Officers pulled the woman away unharmed and the man later died.

LA's SWAT is the legend of reality TV shows and movies. We've heard of the wonderful training that these officers receive to protect hostages. So what, if anything, went wrong? The police chief is standing by the officers, of course, before the investigation is complete. (See links below; the ready link is to KTTV 11 here.)

I've gone to the LA TV station's websites; e.g., KABC 7, KCBS 2, KNBC 4, KCAL 9, KMEX 34; and they all are covering it extensively.

The rest of the child's family has a press conference which will be live on KNBC 4's website at 11 a.m. PDT. It will likely remain there for the rest of the day. The family says that the police essentially botched it, firing 90 rounds at the gunman. The mother pleaded with them not to shoot. For the sake of the police, they should pray that the autopsy shows that her father killed her and not them. The family spokesmen said: "We're not buying it," "90 shots is overkill," and "why didn't they wait him out?"

And are we suprised that the Chief of Police passes judgment on the shooting before the facts are in? Not me. When I was a deputy prosecuting attorney in another life, 30 years ago, when on call, we had to go to every officer involved shooting. That was before cell phones so we were stuck at home. I've been to a few, and the cops fall all over themselves to suck up and make it justified.

Apparently times have not changed.

< Right Wing Group Urges No Consensus Judge | Judith Miller: How Did They Know? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed toddler | 45 comments (45 topical)
    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#1)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:08 PM EST
    I've been to a few, and the cops fall all over themselves to suck up and make it justified.
    Apparently times have not changed.
    And are we suprised that the Chief of Police passes judgment on the shooting before the facts are in? Not me.
    And are we surprised that some "has been" passes judgement here, before all the facts are in....Not me, not here. So you've been to a few police shootings and can somehow extrapolate from that limited experience that the cops are "suck(ing) up" to make it justified in this case? It's tragic no matter what the outcome of the autopsy is, but this criminal was hiding behind a baby while shooting at police, three separate times. Of course it's the cops fault.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#2)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:08 PM EST
    Yes it is, it is tragic as you say - "It's tragic no matter what the outcome of the autopsy is, but this criminal was hiding behind a baby while shooting at police, three separate times. Of course it's the cops fault." What would you have done, Patrick? How would have handled the situation? Had one 'shooter' rather than the entire lot opening fire?

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#3)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:08 PM EST
    Oh, one other small bit of info -
    "The family says that the police essentially botched it, firing 90 rounds at the gunman."
    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#4)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:08 PM EST
    F***ing tragic. Where was God? Where is Nancy Grace? Instead, we want to know, where was the sniper?

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#5)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:08 PM EST
    patrick and a chief of cops support killing babies to take out a criminal. SOP for the lapd. bratton's comment that "Bratton said the fatal shooting was only the second time a hostage had been killed since the department formed its SWAT team in 1967." is a lie. It may be the 2nd time cops neligently* killed a hostage, but several hostages have died in SWAT actions, and even more often SWAT targeted the wrong house and/or person resulting in deaths or just had 'collateral damage.' *yes, if you fire 90 rounds in the direction of a baby, a resonable person can conclude that the baby will probably get hit.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    Here is what passes for judgment: "Chief coroner's investigator Craig Harvey said the Police Department requested that results not be released. " and "The Los Angeles Times reported that Pena had been served with a temporary restraining order on Saturday involving allegations of child molestation. Spokespersons for the police and Superior Court said they could find no records of such an order." Cops lie. Ask a judge, ask a prosecutor, ask a defense attorney, ask a plaintiff, ask a defendant, ask their fellow cops ... cops lie.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#7)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    patrick and a chief of cops support killing babies to take out a criminal. SOP for the lapd.
    Classic, strawman. Par for the course from sailor.
    What would you have done, Patrick? How would have handled the situation?
    If I thought you were really interested, I'd answer. But based on your previous comments directed at me you're more concerned with grading my written work.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#8)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    It wasn't a strawman, that was the justification as stated by bernie. Nice prevaricating cop, try answering the points. I will agree with you on one point:"this criminal was hiding behind a baby while shooting at police, three separate times. Of course it's the cops fault." Previously you questioned why I didn't trust the coroner's results on taser deaths. here is why: "Chief coroner's investigator Craig Harvey said the Police Department requested that results not be released. "" If the coroner answers to the PD, why would anyone trust their results? BTW, patrick, care to comment on crime labs? You know, the ones the fbi and the houston pd run? The problem is not that people like me don't trust them, it's that your comrades deservedly don't have any credibility . Can you say 'Rampart', the Miami PD hit team, the New Orleans PD, the FBI w/ Bulger? The worst crimes in america are the ones committed by those under color of authority. Until you and yours go after those criminals amongst you, you don't deserve to be trusted or obeyed.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#9)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    "What would you have done, Patrick? How would have handled the situation?" If I thought you were really interested, I'd answer. But based on your previous comments directed at me you're more concerned with grading my written work.
    These were my questions, Patrick - not Sailor's. As for grading - the use of 'your' for 'you are' is a uh, minor shortcoming, i.e., it makes me nuts. It wasn't anything personal; your comment just happened to be the one I saw first. I'd like to know. Because I just don't see the logic of having several people opening fire when a hostage is involved, especially a child being used as deflection or a shield. I haven't really had 'bad' experiences with cops anywhere I've been. I work around them in our ER (ED)- the same ones usually come in most of the time. What I do know is that just like any profession, there is covering, bullsh*tting, lying, stalling - all kinds of tactics. I see it in medicine. So please, do not tell me it does not exist on police forces. It does - just like crap exists within medicine.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#10)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    Sailor, You said it all. Thanks.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#11)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    The worst crimes in america are the ones committed by those under color of authority. Until you and yours go after those criminals amongst you, you don't deserve to be trusted or obeyed.
    Well you know what they say about opinions. Some are just stink, enjoy that club. Thanks for sharing yours.
    *yes, if you fire 90 rounds in the direction of a baby, a resonable person can conclude that the baby will probably get hit.
    You know for sure the cops fired 90 rounds or I think you're talking out of you "opinion." You're part of the problem in our county. So willing to go off, half informed with little or no investigation. So filled with hated and fear of that which you don't understand. If I had your would view, I'd kill myself. Kitt, I was aware the question was yours, and I banked on you being able to figure that out. Sailor's a different story. As I'm sure you're aware, I've never claimed LEO's were perfect or free of corruption. But, I know for a fact that it is not a pervasive as some here wish it to be. Cops are a cross segment of America just like any other profession. Most are good some are bad, most are heroes some are criminals. That said, we don't know what happened at the scene yet and until we do, it's hard to say. I'm sure there was a designated shooter, and probably a sniper as well. In a perfect world, negotitations would have continued until the suspect surrendered peacefully. That didn't happen. Taking a single, well-aimed, instantly incapactiating shot would have been the next best option. That's nearly impossible even when the suspect is cooperating and not moving and shooting. In this case, if the reports are correct, the suspect was firing and had fired 40 rounds (Which could be part of the 90 the family says the police fired) in three separate engagements. He needed to be stopped so I would have ordered my best shooters to end the situation. I don't think for one minute there's a cop out there who would be happy to shoot an 18 month old child, and regardless of how this turns out, they did a tough job and ended an extremely dangerous situation. Some of them may never recover completely emotionally from what they just participated in. There will always be room to monday morning quarterback any critical incident, and there will always be valid criticisms of any police shooting, but we don't have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight as the incident is happening, much like the ER.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#12)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    Patrick - Let me show you something. Actually, this is for everyone. This:
    Well you know what they say about opinions. Some are just stink, enjoy that club. Thanks for sharing yours.
    And, this:
    You know for sure the cops fired 90 rounds or I think you're talking out of you "opinion." You're part of the problem in our county. So willing to go off, half informed with little or no investigation. So filled with hated and fear of that which you don't understand. If I had your would view, I'd kill myself.
    What kind of response do you think you'll get when you write something like that? To me, when ANYONE writes something like that, they're not looking for answers - they're simply looking to insult. No, Patrick - you've never said LEOs are perfect. You have certainly defended actions performed by LE as laudable which others find despicable whether that was your intent, I think simply because they're LE. I would no sooner defend every physician, nurse, tech, therapist because I know that interspersed with those who are "good" are those who are genuine f*ck-ups. Man, I worked with some! While you're accusing us of 'second-guessing', Patrick - you're doing the same thing. If this suspect fired 40 rounds, how many guns did he have? Did he have a number of guns or just one? Wouldn't he at some point run out of ammunition even given that he might've had extra clips in his pocket? During that length of time of 3 or less hours some kind of strategy couldn't be thought out to diminish the number of people firing AT the suspect? I need coffee.....

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#13)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    What kind of response do you think you'll get when you write something like that?
    I'm certainly not expecting meaningful dialog from sailor, he's said all I need to hear in his previous comments, so excuse me for not being particulary kind or receptive to his comments. I don't think I'm inclined to change at this point.
    You have certainly defended actions performed by LE as laudable which others find despicable whether that was your intent, I think simply because they're LE.
    Perhaps it's a perspective issue. I don't think I've supported cops convicted of crimes or other misconduct, but not suprising to me, there is a long list of threads related to alledged police miscoduct which contain baseless allegations and sweeping generalizations from people who post here. And there is very little follow-up except when there is an aquittal and then it's not because the truth came to light it's because the system is corrupt and the cops lie. I try to offer a balancing opinion, because I believe in most cases the operators of this site are biased against law enforcement and not balanced or objectice. I think the person who started this thread falls into that category as well and have been visiting his site for at least the past year or so. In may cases, it's impossible to know whether or not a cop made the "right" choice in deciding to use force or not, but many here seem to feel qualifed to make that judgement. To be honest, I don't think you're (See I can get it right) looking for honest dialog about this incident. It feels to me that you've already made up your mind. We don't know how many rounds were fired, my information comes from the same article you read. 40 rounds is less than the capacity of three 15 round clips for just about any semi-auto handgun, and they are readily available despite the high-cap magazine ban. It takes two seconds or less to reload. We don't kow how many guns the suspect had, although based on what I've read it seems reasonable to conclude there was only one. And given time to reload and with enough ammunition there is no telling how long it would have been til he ran out of ammunition. If you're suggesting the police have waited till he ran out of ammunition, I believe that is a seriously flawed strategy. Each bullet he fires has the capability of killing someone and has to end up somewhere. As far as other strategies are concerned, I'm sure there were many, including various immediate action hostage rescue plans that are standard in any operational briefing and trained on until there's a high state of readiness. LAPD SWAT is one of the highest trained special operations groups (Military or civilian) in the country. If they couldn't get it done right, there's a good chance it couldn't be done right.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#14)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    Kitt, And I think it's somewhat hypocritical to call me on my inflammatory posts (Which I take full responsibility for and did intentionally). I've quoted some of those in this thread. Isn't there a favorite bible quote tossed around in here quite a bit about removing the plank from your own eye.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#15)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM EST
    Patrick - I haven't made up my mind yet - Jesus! I'm asking YOU what you would have done in the situation.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#16)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    I believe I answered that no? I would have used deadly force if it was appropriate. We'll probably disagree on when it would be appropriate.
    - Jesus!
    I'm not sure I understand your use of that word with the exclamation point. I didn't know I was being defensive, or however your comment was meant to infer. I was trying to you some information related to your comments, more than half of which I felt were picking at my comments directed to someone else, in the hopes of giving you some idea of my perspective. It's tough trying to explain a lifetime of experiences and training in a few lines of type. Especially when were talking about the loss of an 18 month old life.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#17)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Patrick- In my state of Florida, EVERY police shooting EVER has been found to be justified, even when physical evidence proves that the officers are lying. I hope that you will forgive my scepticism, it must be my enviroment

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#18)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    (Jesus!) Frustration, Patrick. I don't have a motive in finding out your perspective. I'm not interested in trashing it.
    I was trying to you some information related to your comments, more than half of which I felt were picking at my comments directed to someone else, in the hopes of giving you some idea of my perspective
    . I think a word is missing somewhere in here...I'm not following. 'Picking at my comments' - is that how you see it? You make a statement. I want to know why or how it is you're reaching it and it's "picking." You're exactly right, Patrick. It is hard to put a lifetime of experience into a couple of typed lines that adequately expresses whatever. Here - what you think does not change how I view the LEOs I see almost daily while at work. There's one I cannot stand and there are several others who are decent men & women. I've seen their reactions and heard them talk about cases they've brought in. Nor does it diminish the experiences I have had with LE. Besides - what plank?

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#19)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Patrick - Let me show you something. Actually, this is for everyone. This:
    Well you know what they say about opinions. Some are just stink, enjoy that club. Thanks for sharing yours.
    And, this:
    You know for sure the cops fired 90 rounds or I think you're talking out of you "opinion." You're part of the problem in our county. So willing to go off, half informed with little or no investigation. So filled with hated and fear of that which you don't understand. If I had your would view, I'd kill myself.
    What kind of response do you think you'll get when you write something like that? To me, when ANYONE writes something like that, they're not looking for answers - they're simply looking to insult.
    Yes, I took that as picking at my post regarding comments that were not directed at you. The plank is the one which causes you to be critical of me for being infammatory and not of the others who said equally inflammatory things in this very thread. But then I went back and looked at your comment and you did include everyone so I was wrong, but once you post it, you can't edit it. Roger, I highly doubt that's true, but I'm not inclined to research it find out.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#20)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Yeah - I did include everyone, even myself. I don't usually attempt to be inflammatory simply because I have neither the inclination nor the time - nor the patience. Words on a page do not do justice to inflection, tone, mood et al.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#21)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    It's also my training that you need to modify your method of communication based on the intended recipient. So I speak in such terms to people like sailor because that's how they get the message, or don't get the message, it's really no skin of my back.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#22)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Here's today's story on the shootout

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#23)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Sadly, What I am telling you about FDLE and Leo shootings is true, I wish that it was not, but thanks for thinking ill of me without bothering to look anything up. If you like cops investigating themselves, you should like this one

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#24)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Roger, Sadly, it's not true. Or at least it's not true according to the ACLU and I'll be the first to admit can't be trusted. Here's the excerpt which proves you wrong.
    The shooting occurred in the midst of a federal grand jury inquiry that led to the indictment of several City of Miami police officers accused of planting guns to cover up unjustified shootings.
    In case you want to look yourself this was in the first paragraph of the linked to article, which by the way was the first link I looked at after my google search. Wasn't hard to find.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#25)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Hey Rog, That link's over five years old. Any link to where those officers are today or what happened? That would be nice to know.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#26)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Patrick- Your confusion is understandable. FDLE is the agency responsible for LEO shooting (amonst other duties) they have NEVER faulted a shooting. When things do occaisionally get really f-ed up, the Feds may step in, but that is an entirely different situation.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#27)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    Roger, You were pretty clear, and there was no confusion on my part. Here's your post.
    Posted by Roger at July 13, 2005 10:55 AM Patrick- In my state of Florida, EVERY police shooting EVER has been found to be justified, even when physical evidence proves that the officers are lying. I hope that you will forgive my scepticism, it must be my enviroment
    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#28)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:10 PM EST
    And the State has never found a police shooting they didnt like. So?

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#29)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    So? Your statment was inaccurate. Which was my point from the beginning. Even now that you've qualified it, it still seems highly unlikely.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#30)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    Patrick- I said that a shooting had never been found bad in Florida. You pointed out that the feds have become involved in the past. This just bolsters my point. But, somehow, you have to resort to calling people liars.... Typical cop

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#31)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    Roger, Your statement is in black and white above, and so is the fact that Miami Cops were indicted in an unjustified shooting W/ a link to the ALCU site that reports it. And that's Miami Florida, not Ohio. Your statement is innacurate, sorry I can't help you there. Typical defense lawyer. P.S. I never once said you were a liar, perhaps you do have a conscience after all.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#32)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    kitt, thanks for your patience with personal attacks made by some on this site. When I stated "patrick and a chief of cops support killing babies to take out a criminal. SOP for the lapd.", while the rhetoric was inflammatory, the point was legitimate. pat and bratton both said the shooting of both was justified, so I don't consider that a personal attack. Both of them also made their statements before the after action report was completed. If I am too quick to condemn the cops, it should be noted that I have no ability to hold press conferences or command reporters' attention. Public officials who have these abilities are constantly supporting cops before the facts are in. Apparently, the lapd swat is not very well trained if a (single) sharpshooter can't take out full grown man hiding behind an infant. I'm a lousy shot, but I can hit a dinner plate at 100 yards with a cheap rifle. (Any marksman on this site will tell you this is very poor shooting;-) They didn't use rifles, they used handguns. And according to bratton "Police said Pena fired about 40 rounds in three shooting outbursts over nearly 3 hours. Eleven officers fired during the standoff, shooting about 90 rounds, Bratton said." He had a handgun and a shotgun. How many times did he have to reload to fire '40' rounds. Since they lied about the 'child molestation' they probably lied about the # of rounds he fired. "Police have previously said that Peña had been accused of child molestation." tho there is no record of that. Then bratton changed his story: "In defending his officers' actions, Bratton offered new details of the police version of the shootout. It began about 2 p.m. Sunday when "officers took a domestic terror report from his wife," meaning Lopez. Bratton said officers responded, taking a report of the incident from Lopez" Uhh, 'domestic terror'!? What the hell does that mean? Sounds like a job for DHS;-) I feel bratton is hoist on his own petard: "An angry Police Chief William J. Bratton lashed out Tuesday against slain shootout suspect Jose Raul Peña, calling him a "coldblooded killer". Yet "local media reported that Pena, who grew up in El Salvador, was well loved in the community, having been commended by Mayor James Hahn in 2002 for saving a man from being hit by a commuter train." Yeah, sounds like there were some cold blooded killers present. They also used a flashbang grenade where an infant was known to be. My personal opinion is that they wanted revenge after an officer was wounded and didn't care who they killed to get their way. I would also love to see the autopsy results on Pena and his daughter, tho they probably will be dishonest because :"Coroner's officials said Tuesday that police placed a security hold on the autopsy results because of the pending investigation. At the news conference, however, Bratton said there was no police hold" JMHO. btw, pat, the bible refers to 'mote' and 'beam', not 'planks' . And your language reference to "to be honest, I don't think you're (See I can get it right) " ... uhh, you don't cap in parens statements. OTOH, I frequently make typos, violate Strunks and my text2vox reader, especially at home, can't catch homonyms or homophones.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#33)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    A total of 11 officers fired nearly 90 shots at Pena. CNN Tonight The report said it came from a Los Angeles Police Department officer's rifle. 90 shots cannot be part of the training in hostage situations.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#34)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    "The LAPD's Force Investigation Division is expected to give Bratton a briefing today on the preliminary results of its probe, which is being monitored by the Police Commission's inspector general and the District Attorney's Office, as is routine in officer-involved shootings." The Christopher Commision recommended that a TRUE civilian oversight committee be formed. pat, hasn't this happened yet? My prediction is that like every other lapd murder (ok, maybe just negligent homicide in this case), this killing of an infant will be upheld. But the civil case resulting from it will find the officers at fault and LA will have to pay out millions. Money isn't justice, but it is as close as poor people can come in LA.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#35)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    JL, The 90 shots were fired during the entire standoff. Sounds like alot but with 11 officers firing it's less than 9 per officer during three different engagements or three per officer each time. I don't beleive the 90 shots were all from the SWAT Team, I would venture to say that some were probably fired during the initial response by patrol officers. We can argue what if's all day long, my point was, and is, that we should wait until the investigation is complete before hanging these or any officers out to dry. Unlike the author of this post.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#36)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:12 PM EST
    Well, I was wrong on one point, "The child died of a single rifle shot to the head, while Mr. Pena was hit by multiple police bullets, Mr. Bratton said, citing the autopsy." So swat did use rifles. these are highly trained pros? marksmen? Nah, just another LA gang that can't shoot straight. And apparently bratton doesn't have pat's qualms about commenting on matters before the all the facts are in: "While admitting police responsibility for the child's death, Chief Bratton continued to insist that the shooting was justified. He said that a preliminary investigation had found no grounds for filing criminal charges against any officers." yep, firing 90 rounds in the direction of a baby is SOP for the lapd.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#37)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:12 PM EST
    Ohh jeez, more info in "[bratton] said the cameras showed that the heavy fire between Peña and police, in which one officer was wounded, appeared to be continuous over the course of several hours." 40 rounds over several hours is continuous!? c'mon, pat, even you have to call BS at that statement. And what a surprise, lapd won't release the videos.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#38)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:12 PM EST
    Oh god... A single rifle shot to the head?

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:12 PM EST
    While I agree that the baby's death is unfortunate, I cannont believe that sh*t that most of you are giving these cops. The FATHER threatened to kill his baby. The FATHER used her as a human shield. The FATHER started and continued shooting at police. What did you expect the cops to do, each one take a bullet for the baby??? Moronic. You all are just demonizing the cops because you hate all cops. Bad shooting? The simple fact that the baby only, accidentally at that, got hit once, and the father took several shot, while most likely moving erratically AND SHOOTING BACK, speaks highly of the SWAT shooters. But I'm sure if you were to place yourselves in their shoes, you would have just taken the bullet, right?

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#40)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:12 PM EST
    Are they sharpshooters? 9 shots per officer? I was an expert marksman during my stint in the military. You only need one shot to his head to take him out. There were how many cops there? All decided they had the shot? Arey you telling me that they were shooting over a period of time? How much time? Are these excellent marksmen? You are suggesting that 90 rounds were fired in over an hour and none of them could catch a head shot? Ridiculous. One of them DID NOT HAVE THE SHOT as is obvious by hitting Susie in the head. Ern, I would not have taken the bullet, but I would have made damn sure my SWAT team knew who had the shot and who was to take it.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#41)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:13 PM EST
    I was an expert marksman during my stint in the military
    So was I, but of course, I, like you was shooting at a stationary paper target that was not shooting back. I'm sorry JL you're smarter than your comment, and I think you know it.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#42)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:19 PM EST
    Now the coroner is admitting the baby was hit more than once. Probably because he fears the family's attorney will arrange an independent autopsy. There were about 27 hours of video tape from multiple cameras. The cops aren't releasing it, but they carefully edited a highlight reel to fool the press

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#43)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    The cops aren't releasing it, but they carefully edited a highlight reel to fool the press
    And you wonder why I attack you. Geesh go figure. Thanks for your opinion.

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#44)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:32 PM EST
    pat, I make my comments for the community at large. The fact is that the cops have over 27 hours of vid tape and edited it out to 5 minutes that supported their POV and refused to release the rest. If you have facts, please say and link to them. What do you say about the coroner originally saying the baby was hit only once in the head, and now reveals there were 2 other gunshot wounds? Do you think it was a mistake, that he missed 2 more rifle rounds? Was there a 'magic' bullet that entered the baby's head and somehow came out her thigh and calf? Instead of attacking me, why don't you address the facts?

    Re: CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed tod (none / 0) (#45)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:32 PM EST
    pat, I make my comments for the community at large.
    Thank God we have you to tell how to think.
    The fact is that the cops have over 27 hours of vid tape and edited it out to 5 minutes that supported their POV and refused to release the rest.
    Link to this fact? But let's assume for the argument that there are 27 hours of video tape. That is the fact, the rest is your inference from the fact which is an opinion. And I think it's B.S.
    Instead of attacking me, why don't you address the facts?
    Because the facts speak for themselves. Your opinions and the inferences you draw from the facts are what I'm showing to be a sophomoric attempt to slander law enforcement. You are the one offering your opinions and therefore opening yourself to legitimate criticism for the conclusions you're drawing. If you can't handle someone pointing out the fallacy in your arguments, go somewhere else where you can participate in what you're looking for, an intellectual circle jerk.

    CNN: Autopsy to determine if police killed toddler | 45 comments (45 topical)