Mike, I have no info on that particular case, but i am aware of several where the suspect was not searched or searched poorly and had a gun still on them after being cuffed. You know there are contortionists out there who can make their bodies move in ways most people can't. Mobile PD officer Green was killed in 2012 by knife attack at the PD after the suspect was cuffed and searched. Watch the video at .31 when the suspect was being walked to the patrol car after the initial arrest, you can see even though he was cuffed behind his back, his right hand is at the front of his chest probably retrieving a hidden knife from the neck ornament he was wearing. It is possible that the LA incident happened as the police are reporting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-8gWVES6eI
As a forensic pathologist, I've seen cases where people shoot themselves in the chest while handcuffed "behind their back." In the case I'm thinking of, the decedent brought his hands forward so that he was sitting on them, and shot up through is legs.
Another thing to note is that in an autopsy report, "chest" does not necessarily mean "front." It means the thoracic cavity. In other words, if you get shot through the front of the chest, or if you get shot in the back, the damage done to the contents of the thoracic cavity. How a given pathologist signs it out is a matter of local idiom -- some will say "gunshot of thorax," some will say "gunshot of back," some will say "gunshot of chest cavity," and some will say "gunshot of chest." The problem is that no matter how you say it, somebody will figure out a way to misinterpret it in a sound bite.
You'd have to read the autopsy report to see if the shot was from the front or if he was shot in the back with the bullet travelling into the chest cavity.
Well, I see from comments here there is no dearth of apologists for the badged thugs. Reading the news report one should have great faith the truth will be told, as the Staatspolizei are "investigating".
several years ago in Houston a handcuffed suspect in the back of a police car who had a concealed weapon, stepped thru his arms to get them in front of him, drew the weapon and shot the police officer in the back of the head. Strange things can happen.
The article says he shot himself in the back, not the chest. That is certainly possible. Also, it's a "throw down" gun, not a throw gun. At least, that's the way I've heard it called.
I have no problem believing that an accused might be able to conceal a weapon such that it might not be detected in a standard "safety" pat down (even though, SCOTUS not withstanding, I remain fervently convinced that it constitutes a search. Nor do I have any difficulty believing that someone might be able to defeat being cuffed behind his back. I do have a bit of difficulty accepting that an accused who was 1) able to smuggle a weapon into the back seat of a police car and 2) able to defeat being cuffed behind his back would then proceed to shoot HIMSELF as opposed to his captors. That is what strains credulity for me. Like others I am aware that some LEOs have access to "throw away" weapons and that the good old boy network protects cops. I also note that this happened in rural Louisiana.
For Dr "billo", as a forensic pathologist, have you ever observed a decedent who was able to deliver a contact wound to the lateral chest while handcuffed behind the back?
But the real sticking point for me is the "suicide". Assuming that the accused was an habitual criminal (because regular folks don't generally even TRY to secret a weapon in a police car much less know how to do so) who had both the necessary skill to hide the weapon and the desire to do so, why would he turn the weapon upon himself not his captors? I doubt this was the first trip to the booking center for Mr. White. If so, what was his motivation to suicide? If it WAS his first trip to the booking center, where/when/how did he acquire the necessary sill to hide the weapon so well? Even if it was his arrest, what was his motive for suicide?
Sadly, the fact that someone died in police custody is an all too common occurrence today. And, yes, suicides do occur in jails (although the true number to be significantly lower than the reported) on occasion. But this one just smells. I believe that there are enough circumstances to create a reasonable doubt that this man actually committed suicide.
Humans sometimes lie. Cops are human. Therefor cops sometimes lie.
'For Dr "billo", as a forensic pathologist, have you ever observed a decedent who was able to deliver a contact wound to the lateral chest while handcuffed behind the back?'
I have not had a case, but I have no problem seeing how it is done. You'd be surprised how things can line up when people are squiggling about. Everybody assumes certain positions of the body and the gun in these kinds of things, and such assumptions are often incorrect.
Put your hands behind your back as if you were handcuffed, with your hands clasped together. Note that your forearms tend to follow the base of the ribcage. Your hands will also be just at the base of the thorax. For me, my hand naturally rests right at T10.
Now, imagine holding a pistol with the barrel pointed roughly upwards. Lean backwards slightly. If you fire, the bullet will travel into the diaphragmatic recess upwards into the chest cavity. If you move your hands right or left from the midline, that will result in a close/near-contact/contact wound, depending on the precise orientation of the torso. Since you have moved to the right or left, it will be to the (postero)lateral chest. If you wiggle far enough, it wil be to the lateral chest. The geometry works out well.
As far as it being a suicide, that's a matter of convention. In many jurisdictions, all gunshot wounds that are not the result of a mechanical failure of the weapon are classified as either suicide or homicide, depending on who is holding the weapon. The thinking is that a firearm is a dangerous thing, and any time a trigger is pulled the person pulling the trigger "should" know that there's a danger of death. Thus, even if the shooter did not "intend" to kill someone, the degree of recklessness still makes it a homicide or suicide. In other words, a hunter out hunting who shoots at a deer and hits a man has committed a homicide, not an accidental shooting. Thus, in such a jurisdiction, the thought would be that it's a suicide, not accident, because the person in custody should have known how dangerous it was to juggle a loaded gun in such a situation. That makes the action perfomed in reckless disregard for safety, which makes it a suicide.
Some forensic pathologists (such as myself) believe that this is more a reflection of anti-gun sentiment than real understanding of the issues. For instance, the same standard is not applied to car accidents, where it's an accident unless the driver actively tries to run someone down (except in some jurisdictions where it's a homicide again if the driver is intoxicated). However, we are in the minority.
If you are really interested, I'll refer you to an article I wrote on it that discusses the heterogeneity of manner determination in various jurisdictions: Oliver, WR. Intent in Manner Determination. Academic Forensic Pathology, 2012(2):126-137.
Don't get me wrong. I've seen unjustified killings and beatings by cops, going all the way back to the beating of Rodney King and the shooting of Vicky Weaver at Ruby Ridge (both of which are cases I was involved in). I'm not an apologist for them. But, after investigating a lot of these things, the cops are not at fault more often than they are. In particular, sometimes people being taken into custody (or in custody) do amazingly stupid things, particularly when they are drunk, intoxicated, armed, or any combination thereof.
No matter what happened, once you are handcuffed and in the back of a police car, you are in "Police Custody". While in Custody your health and well being are 100% the responsibility of that officer. He is responsible for that individual's death and should be held accountable.
13 comments:
Mike, I have no info on that particular case, but i am aware of several where the suspect was not searched or searched poorly and had a gun still on them after being cuffed. You know there are contortionists out there who can make their bodies move in ways most people can't. Mobile PD officer Green was killed in 2012 by knife attack at the PD after the suspect was cuffed and searched. Watch the video at .31 when the suspect was being walked to the patrol car after the initial arrest, you can see even though he was cuffed behind his back, his right hand is at the front of his chest probably retrieving a hidden knife from the neck ornament he was wearing. It is possible that the LA incident happened as the police are reporting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-8gWVES6eI
Obama gonna run oudda sons!
As a forensic pathologist, I've seen cases where people shoot themselves in the chest while handcuffed "behind their back." In the case I'm thinking of, the decedent brought his hands forward so that he was sitting on them, and shot up through is legs.
Another thing to note is that in an autopsy report, "chest" does not necessarily mean "front." It means the thoracic cavity. In other words, if you get shot through the front of the chest, or if you get shot in the back, the damage done to the contents of the thoracic cavity. How a given pathologist signs it out is a matter of local idiom -- some will say "gunshot of thorax," some will say "gunshot of back," some will say "gunshot of chest cavity," and some will say "gunshot of chest." The problem is that no matter how you say it, somebody will figure out a way to misinterpret it in a sound bite.
You'd have to read the autopsy report to see if the shot was from the front or if he was shot in the back with the bullet travelling into the chest cavity.
Ever hear of a 'throw' gun? Of course it's not dept issue.
Not a department issue weapon? Might have been one of the officer's "throw always" ...
Well, I see from comments here there is no dearth of apologists for the badged thugs. Reading the news report one should have great faith the truth will be told, as the Staatspolizei are "investigating".
There are no good cops.
I'm surprised it wasn't found to be death by lead poisoning...
several years ago in Houston a handcuffed suspect in the back of a police car who had a concealed weapon, stepped thru his arms to get them in front of him, drew the weapon and shot the police officer in the back of the head. Strange things can happen.
The article says he shot himself in the back, not the chest. That is certainly possible. Also, it's a "throw down" gun, not a throw gun. At least, that's the way I've heard it called.
- Old Greybeard
Sounds like a throw down to me.
I have no problem believing that an accused might be able to conceal a weapon such that it might not be detected in a standard "safety" pat down (even though, SCOTUS not withstanding, I remain fervently convinced that it constitutes a search. Nor do I have any difficulty believing that someone might be able to defeat being cuffed behind his back. I do have a bit of difficulty accepting that an accused who was 1) able to smuggle a weapon into the back seat of a police car and 2) able to defeat being cuffed behind his back would then proceed to shoot HIMSELF as opposed to his captors. That is what strains credulity for me. Like others I am aware that some LEOs have access to "throw away" weapons and that the good old boy network protects cops. I also note that this happened in rural Louisiana.
For Dr "billo", as a forensic pathologist, have you ever observed a decedent who was able to deliver a contact wound to the lateral chest while handcuffed behind the back?
But the real sticking point for me is the "suicide". Assuming that the accused was an habitual criminal (because regular folks don't generally even TRY to secret a weapon in a police car much less know how to do so) who had both the necessary skill to hide the weapon and the desire to do so, why would he turn the weapon upon himself not his captors? I doubt this was the first trip to the booking center for Mr. White. If so, what was his motivation to suicide? If it WAS his first trip to the booking center, where/when/how did he acquire the necessary sill to hide the weapon so well? Even if it was his arrest, what was his motive for suicide?
Sadly, the fact that someone died in police custody is an all too common occurrence today. And, yes, suicides do occur in jails (although the true number to be significantly lower than the reported) on occasion. But this one just smells. I believe that there are enough circumstances to create a reasonable doubt that this man actually committed suicide.
Humans sometimes lie. Cops are human. Therefor cops sometimes lie.
'For Dr "billo", as a forensic pathologist, have you ever observed a decedent who was able to deliver a contact wound to the lateral chest while handcuffed behind the back?'
I have not had a case, but I have no problem seeing how it is done. You'd be surprised how things can line up when people are squiggling about. Everybody assumes certain positions of the body and the gun in these kinds of things, and such assumptions are often incorrect.
Put your hands behind your back as if you were handcuffed, with your hands clasped together. Note that your forearms tend to follow the base of the ribcage. Your hands will also be just at the base of the thorax. For me, my hand naturally rests right at T10.
Now, imagine holding a pistol with the barrel pointed roughly upwards. Lean backwards slightly. If you fire, the bullet will travel into the diaphragmatic recess upwards into the chest cavity. If you move your hands right or left from the midline, that will result in a close/near-contact/contact wound, depending on the precise orientation of the torso. Since you have moved to the right or left, it will be to the (postero)lateral chest. If you wiggle far enough, it wil be to the lateral chest. The geometry works out well.
As far as it being a suicide, that's a matter of convention. In many jurisdictions, all gunshot wounds that are not the result of a mechanical failure of the weapon are classified as either suicide or homicide, depending on who is holding the weapon. The thinking is that a firearm is a dangerous thing, and any time a trigger is pulled the person pulling the trigger "should" know that there's a danger of death. Thus, even if the shooter did not "intend" to kill someone, the degree of recklessness still makes it a homicide or suicide. In other words, a hunter out hunting who shoots at a deer and hits a man has committed a homicide, not an accidental shooting. Thus, in such a jurisdiction, the thought would be that it's a suicide, not accident, because the person in custody should have known how dangerous it was to juggle a loaded gun in such a situation. That makes the action perfomed in reckless disregard for safety, which makes it a suicide.
Some forensic pathologists (such as myself) believe that this is more a reflection of anti-gun sentiment than real understanding of the issues. For instance, the same standard is not applied to car accidents, where it's an accident unless the driver actively tries to run someone down (except in some jurisdictions where it's a homicide again if the driver is intoxicated). However, we are in the minority.
If you are really interested, I'll refer you to an article I wrote on it that discusses the heterogeneity of manner determination in various jurisdictions: Oliver, WR. Intent in Manner Determination. Academic Forensic Pathology, 2012(2):126-137.
Don't get me wrong. I've seen unjustified killings and beatings by cops, going all the way back to the beating of Rodney King and the shooting of Vicky Weaver at Ruby Ridge (both of which are cases I was involved in). I'm not an apologist for them. But, after investigating a lot of these things, the cops are not at fault more often than they are. In particular, sometimes people being taken into custody (or in custody) do amazingly stupid things, particularly when they are drunk, intoxicated, armed, or any combination thereof.
No matter what happened, once you are handcuffed and in the back of a police car, you are in "Police Custody". While in Custody your health and well being are 100% the responsibility of that officer. He is responsible for that individual's death and should be held accountable.
Post a Comment