Autopsy: Toddler hit twice by LAPD, Suzie Marie Lopez

[wmw999 2,589]

I agree entirely. This is just like second-guessing whether someone should or should not have cut away. Only the stakes are bigger, and the newspapers are watching.

As long as their PD has a good review process, that's what it's for. This doesn't sound egregious, it sounds tragic.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[livendive 8]

Quote

I'm certain they were and my heart goes out to them, also. They did, however, fuck up. Like the surgeon in his/her environment, they are responsible for a certain threshold level of competence and performance in theirs.

Can we agree that killing the kid fell below even a minimal threshold of acceptable behavior?

I'm not saying he/she/they are bad people or that we should heap disproportionate consequences upon them, but they are responsible for their actions and they are responsible for the results.

Agreed. People make mistakes in their line of work, regardless of what kind of work they do. If one accepts a career that involves shooting at people, they must also accept that they might someday make the mistake of shooting a wrong person. The fact that it is bound to happen on occasion doesn't make it any less of a screw-up.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Can we agree that killing the kid fell below even a minimal threshold of acceptable behavior?

I'm not saying he/she/they are bad people or that we should heap disproportionate consequences upon them, but they are responsible for their actions and they are responsible for the results.


jen

Certainly we all agree that the outcome was tragic. I just don't have it in me to judge someone who's day-in-day-out job is to be ready to go into that kind of situation and put their own lives on the line, knowing that if things go bad, the microscope will be on them.

This is not a "holier than thou" thing. I'm not criticizing anyone else for their comments. I can somewhat understand where the outrage is coming from. I just really feel for those guys and would rather let them police their own ranks in this situation.

Walt

I'm not outraged. I, also, feel really bad for them. I'm skeptical of police review (in L.A.!!) but they don't deserve to be hanged in public either.

They are professionals who fucked up. It happens. When it happens, the situation should be studied to improve procedures. If individual errors were sufficiently grevious, heads should roll.


jen

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

The LAPD should have been good enough not to shoot a child.

And how would you have handled the situation differently?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

The LAPD should have been good enough not to shoot a child.

And how would you have handled the situation differently?

That's the job of the LAPD to do, not any of us or Rhino.

I wouldn't gig him on the "should have been" comment. It's true and the key word is "should". If followup is done right, the LAPD will evaluate the accounts and also evaluate if the officer is possibly uncurrent or incapable of doing this type of job again in the future. I'm hoping that it turns out the review identifies they did the best they could and that this is a sad tragedy rather than a bad mixup. I certainly like to think that people who choose to be protectors have the best training and great judgement and that none of us could have done better since we aren't trained that way.

But the duty or ability of a cop and the actions of the father are two separate things that must be evaluated separately, in context of the situation.

In the meantime, I give the benefit of the doubt to the professional until proven otherwise.

edit: Jenfly said it well "the situation should be studied to improve procedures. If individual errors were sufficiently grevious, (then a legal and appropriate corrective action should be taken without emotional escalation - A bit of refining here)"

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Can we agree that killing the kid fell below even a minimal threshold of acceptable behavior?

No. Intentionally killing an innocent would. But accidentally hitting a human shield during a heated gun battle? I'm not willing to say that.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[BillyVance 35]

Quote

Quote

Have you guys forgotten Waco or Ruby Ridge or countless other situations where the cops resorted to attacking with weapons?

I don't think many people will EVER forget Waco or Ruby Ridge. I don't think that is a fair comparison, though. Both of those events had the signature of a murderous bitch named Janet Reno.

Walt

And Janet also has her signature on another botched event, the Elian repatriation, with armed SWAT police trying to take a scared and crying Elian from his relative's arms...

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The LAPD should have been good enough not to shoot a child.

And how would you have handled the situation differently?

I wouldn't gig him on the "should have been" comment.

That was nice of you to try and answer that question for him, since he's been ducking it.

But since he's the one being critical, I'd really like to hear from him what he thinks should have been done differently to avoid this tragedy.

It's easy to criticize after the fact. It's a lot tougher to make a life or death decision in the heat of battle. If he's gonna do the former, he ought to be willing to explain what he thinks should have been done differently.

And if he has no suggestions for improvement, then the criticism rings hollow.

[Deuce 1]

Quote

Suzie Marie Lopez died as a result of a high-velocity rifle wound to her head fired from a distance, a medical examination found,

Hey, Rhino, have you considered that maybe the bullets that killed the girl had already travelled through the suspect?

When CNN says "high velocity rifle wound" they are probably including the 9mm or .40 MP5's those guys carry. (My old agencies SWAT team carried the 10mm version of the MP5, talk about a chainsaw)

Anyhow, they threw a flash-bang in there (I'm guessing) and a team member gets shot and starts screaming like people tend to do when they get shot. The threat has escalated to the point where risking the babies life is acceptable, because lots of other folks are now in a potential to die.

It's part of just about every law enforcement oral exam where a suspect is armed needs to be shot, and cops HAVE to have the ability to shoot people. Distilled, the correct answer is "I will shoot at the armed man when the threat he poses to innocent life is greater than the risk I pose shooting at him/her"

Follow up question: "But what if he moves at the last moment while you have pulled the trigger and you shoot the child?"

However that answer is given tells a lot about the character of the applicant.

But they have to eventually take the shot.

And the criticism of you and CNN.

Tough job.

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

The LAPD should have been good enough not to shoot a child.

And how would you have handled the situation differently?

Dude! The LAPD fired more than 100 rounds into the room!!!! This isn't a question of a sniper being just a hair off on aim, this was undisiplined behavior by professionals out of control.

What to do differently? De-escalate? Back off the confrontation and defuse? Did the police force the situation unnecessarily? I don't know. I do know that people tend to use the tools they have. Just because you have a hammer doesn't mean that's the best tool for the job.

OK, things got hot. Perhaps the father took it there, perhaps the police did. Dad was not a professional trained to handle these situations, the police are. An innocent girls life depended on them.
The standoff lasted 180 minutes. Were the police truly out of time and options? If so, then yes, then taking down the bad guy was justified. Multiple officers freaking out and firing dozens of rounds rounds is pretty hard to justify, however.

The gunman/father shot a police officer through the wall, the police returned fire ...through the wall. I repeat, multiple officers firing (some blindly) over 100 rounds.

My brother is a Sgt. on a SWAT team in a a large city. He's always told me ...SWAT wants to go in!
It's their job, their training and their mentality. Sometimes that's what needs to be done but it's hard to imagine officers firing 100 rounds into the room as acceptable professional behavior.

Can you imagine any reasonable circumstance here that would justify such an action?

How would you have handled the situation differently? Kill em all and let God sort em out sounds a bit over the top here.

jen

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

How would you have handled the situation differently?

I'm a current SWAT sniper on a SWAT team in a large city. According to my information, this guy was firing at an unarmed neighber when the police returned fire. The police were trying to get the neighbor out of harms way when the suspect started shooting. One of the police officers was wounded by the suspect. There was no chance to wait him out, seek cover, determine who was going to shoot and who was not in order to limit the number of rounds, or any of the other scenarios that people have submitted. The death of this child lies solely with the idiot father who decided to use her as a shield. My job description does not entail being a willing target for some idiot hell bent on getting himself killed. If you want that job, go for it. Quit expecting others to do it for you.

BTW, when you are getting shot at, you are out of time.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

How would you have handled the situation differently?

I'm a current SWAT sniper on a SWAT team in a large city. According to my information, this guy was firing at an unarmed neighber when the police returned fire. The police were trying to get the neighbor out of harms way when the suspect started shooting. One of the police officers was wounded by the suspect. There was no chance to wait him out, seek cover, determine who was going to shoot and who was not in order to limit the number of rounds, or any of the other scenarios that people have submitted. The death of this child lies solely with the idiot father who decided to use her as a shield. My job description does not entail being a willing target for some idiot hell bent on getting himself killed. If you want that job, go for it. Quit expecting others to do it for you.

BTW, when you are getting shot at, you are out of time.

I pretty much agree with you but see your bias. The firing on a neighbor would flip the decision switch for me (at a bare minimum, it would be my official version :).

From what I have read, an officer was shot through a wall, the gunman was inside. I'd very much like the officers to be cleared, but the emphasis is a bit wrong for me.

Rather than focus on who shot who and whether firing on the gunman was a reasonable response (at that point, I'd have to go along with a precise, professional response from those trained to do the job).

I'd like to examine procedures (my brother informs me, his dept is in the process) to contain while minimizing confrontation. Not making a call on the specifics of this case (we don't know them) but I think there is much to be gained from the examination of the procedures involved.

Dude, I'd support major grant money to look into any alternatives to interventions that end up with a dead kid.

As a SWAT officer, what do you think of the 100 rounds fired in response? Could that possibly be a reasonable response to what we know of this situation. Could a clearer plan and unvaraying command structure have prevented such a massive response?


jen

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

...According to my information, ...

And what information do you get in Texas that's any different than what the rest of the world is hearing?

BTW...the "willing target" comment....dude, if you're SWAT, then you are willing and you are a target.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

And what information do you get in Texas that's any different than what the rest of the world is hearing?

Perhaps information that hasn't been filtered thru the press. Much like the info we get about a DZ fatality from a friend who was there and saw what happened instead of "the parachute failed to open".

[wmw999 2,589]

I'd have to agree. And I know kmcguffee, and he's a standup guy.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

The death of this child lies solely with the idiot father who decided to use her as a shield.

I would also put a lot of the blame on the mother. I saw in the news this morning that the baby had cocaine in her system and it was not ingested the day she died. According to the coroner it either entered her system via breast feeding (mother was using coke) or being exposed to secondary cocaine smoke. In either case the mother knew what was going on and exposed her child to it.

[rhino 0]

Quote

Well I guess that according to your views the father is not at fault at all, for firing on the police as soon as they arrived and barricading himself in closed quarters....

Don't ever put words in my mouth.

[rhino 0]

Quote

And how would you have handled the situation differently?

to start I would have pumped invisible sleeping gas into the vents in the house. End of story.. Walk in.. Grab the perp and walk away.. easy..

I wasn't there. I can't necessarily criticize the same way a civilian really can't criticize a soldier in combat. It's easy for me to say what I would have done. 2.5 hours is a short negotiation. If he was shooting at cops they could have backed off. Maybe that wasn't possible. either way, the child's death should not have happened. Very tragic.

[rhino 0]

Quote

BTW, when you are getting shot at, you are out of time.

I don't agree. Aimed shots are different than shots that weren't aimed. If I am at 1,000 yards and you are shooting in my direction, yet I am looking through an m40 at you, I don't feel threatened. Hell I wouldn't feel threatened at 200 yards.

This guy shot a a neighbor? Then a sniper like yourself should have had a clean shot at him... I know I would have dropped him had he been in my scope. And a child wouldn't have been hit. From 100 yards you should be able to pick off eye brows on a moving target. The little girl was shot in the leg and in the head. You know as a swat sniper someone should have had line of site on this dirt bag. Correct me if I am wrong..

Rhino

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

to start I would have pumped invisible sleeping gas into the vents in the house. End of story.. Walk in.. Grab the perp and walk away.. easy..

I wasn't there. I can't necessarily criticize the same way a civilian really can't criticize a soldier in combat. It's easy for me to say what I would have done. 2.5 hours is a short negotiation. If he was shooting at cops they could have backed off. Maybe that wasn't possible. either way, the child's death should not have happened. Very tragic.

The Russians tried the sleeping gas trick, and ended up killing most everyone, including the hostages, in a terrorist movie theatre incident. And I'm just guessing, but I'll bet the baby would have been more at risk of harm from the gas, then the man who was using her as a human shield. And then we could have all blamed you for being irresponsible for pumping deadly gas into a room with a baby, and cried about how that child's tragic death should not have happened, if only Rhino hadn't been so incompetent and reckless.

You say you "can't necessarily criticize", yet you did anyway. Whether 2.5 hours is a short negotiation or not, depends upon the circumstances. A man that is shooting at people doesn't deserve to be given free reign to continue shooting as long as he wants. You say "maybe that wasn't possible", which is an admission that you don't know the details of the incident, and therefore have no business making second-guess judgements about it.

Lots of children die every year. In a perfect world, those wouldn't happen. But we don't live in a perfect world. We live in a world with a lot of assholes who are willing to kill children through murder, carelessness and neglect. That is not the fault of the police who try to intervene to save the children, it is the fault of the assholes who put them in jeopardy. Period.

Blame the asshole, don't blame the cops.

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

As a SWAT officer, what do you think of the 100 rounds fired in response? Could that possibly be a reasonable response to what we know of this situation.

When faced with deadly force, a police officer is allowed to use deadly force until the threat is eliminated. Unless they were shooting after he dropped the gun and was lying on the ground it was reasonable. People don't drop immediately after they are shot. In fact, most people I have talked to who have been shot described it as feeling like a bee sting. It takes about a minute for someone to succumb to loss of blood even if they are shot directly in the heart. They can still do a lot of damage during that minute.

Quote

Could a clearer plan and unvaraying command structure have prevented such a massive response?

Yes, it always can. In this situation the SWAT team was forced to act due to the suspect shooting on the neighbor. I'm sure there are lots of things they could have done better. That is best handled in a review of the situation, not rampant criticism with partial information. I'll guarantee you that none of those SWAT operators wanted to kill that little girl.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

Aimed shots are different than shots that weren't aimed.

If the barrel is pointing at you and he is pulling the trigger, you're attitude will change. Your just as dead from a lucky shot to the head as you are from an aimed shot to the head.

Quote

Then a sniper like yourself should have had a clean shot at him

In a perfect world, and on the movies, the sniper always has a clean line of sight to the suspect and everything is crystal clear. It rarely happens like that in real life. Subjects like to move around, walk behind stuff, and generally not stay with the plan.

Quote

From 100 yards you should be able to pick off eye brows on a moving target.

I can hit a stationary target between the eyes from 500 yds but a moving target at 100 yds is a different story. I always aim center of mass on moving targets. Too many variables involved. If you can do it consistently then you should start competing.

Quote

You know as a swat sniper someone should have had line of site on this dirt bag. Correct me if I am wrong..

I'm sure they were trying to get line of sight on him but when he started shooting at the other officers they didn't know if a sniper had the suspect in his sights. I would have returned fire too. I'm not going to sit and let someone shoot at me praying that someone else shoots him.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

BTW...the "willing target" comment....dude, if you're SWAT, then you are willing and you are a target.

No I'm not. Targets don't shoot back. I do.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

As a SWAT officer, what do you think of the 100 rounds fired in response? Could that possibly be a reasonable response to what we know of this situation.

When faced with deadly force, a police officer is allowed to use deadly force until the threat is eliminated. Unless they were shooting after he dropped the gun and was lying on the ground it was reasonable. People don't drop immediately after they are shot. In fact, most people I have talked to who have been shot described it as feeling like a bee sting. It takes about a minute for someone to succumb to loss of blood even if they are shot directly in the heart. They can still do a lot of damage during that minute./reply]

I've been searching the net for facts about this event. The neighbor in harms way has never been mentioned. Combine that with the fact that SWAT had control of the area for 2 1/2 hrs, does it seem strange (convenient?) to you that a neighbor is suddenly in harms way?

A neighbor might be harmed so you pump 100 rounds into the area and say fuck the kid?!?!? What kind of professional makes this decision? The fact that you try and justify it speaks well of your loyalty, but little else.

My best guess, massive over-reaction with a convenient fiction about a neighbor.

I still say rather than try and hang the shooters, tactics, philosophy in hostage situations and command structure shoud be reviewed.

jen

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

• Quote

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

I still say rather than try and hang the shooters, tactics, philosophy in hostage situations and command structure shoud be reviewed.

I'm sure they will be. And I'm equally sure that there will be people who disagree with the conclusions.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)