Philly PD does it again

[oneshooter]

A 23-year-old man shot in the chest by an off-duty Philadelphia police officer was in a medically induced coma Tuesday after sustaining severe liver damage, his fiancée said.
The Monday afternoon shooting left the family and neighbors of Josh Taylor with many questions about the officer's actions, insisting that the officer was not provoked and shot Taylor in his own house in front of his children.

The officer, who has not been identified, works in the 18th Police District and is a 17-year veteran. He has been moved to a desk job, which is standard protocol after any police shooting.

The officer told investigators he was helping a relative move into a house on Worth Street about 4 p.m. Monday when he saw Taylor, carrying a handgun, walk in and out of a house across the street.

The officer said he identified himself as a police officer and demanded that Taylor drop his weapon but said Taylor tried to escape by going into his home. In the process, police said, Taylor pointed the gun at the officer. At that point, the officer fired and hit Taylor in the chest.

Off duty officer in street clothes, does not know the neighborhood, chases and shoots a man in his own house.

More here: http://articles.philly.com/2011-04-27/news/29478789_1_police-officer-police-shooting-shooting-range

The opinion of one of his fellow officers: http://articles.philly.com/2011-04-26/news/29474771_1_officer-involved-shooting-real-officers-witness

Can't say a lot, not my city, not my state.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas


Oneshooter

[MyrnaLoy]

1. OK

You're point?

"The officer said he identified himself as a police officer and demanded that Taylor drop his weapon but said Taylor tried to escape by going into his home. In the process, police said, Taylor pointed the gun at the officer. At that point, the officer fired and hit Taylor in the chest."

He shoulda dropped the gun.

[eqfan592]

2. Ah, so we now believe police 100% of the time, eh?

Interesting. I wonder if you would feel the same if a firearm weren't involved in the story. Somehow I doubt it.

EDIT: also, given to the fact that open carry is legal in the city, the officer is gonna have to establish some other probable cause for confronting the man in the first place.

[MyrnaLoy]

4. see here's the difference

If I'm ever asked by a police officer with a gun to do something I do it and let the court sort it out. That's how we do things and it works pretty good. Walking around your neighborhood with a gun is never a good idea. Did you also realize he had a permit for the gun? Don't you think a permit holder would have been smart enough to drop the weapon and not run? This one ran and got shot, just another criminal.

Johnathan Turley on the shooting:

"The officer could justify the invasion of the home on the basis of hot pursuit, though most departments would expect the office to call for backup. Taylor was reportedly shot in front of the young children. If true, the pursuit may have increased the risk of a shooting of an innocent bystander. On the other hand, if Taylor was visibly displaying a weapon, the officer was expected to take action. He would, however, be expected to identify himself as an officer."

http://jonathanturley.org/2011/04/27/philadelphia-officer-chases-man-into-his-home-and-shoots-him-in-a-controversial-incident-with-neighbor/

good luck with your outrage.

[eqfan592]

6. This isn't a uniformed officer we are talking about here.

It was a guy that ran up to the person in question with a gun drawn. The officer claimed he ID'ed himself, but how? We have no idea about a lot of the details of this. I also don't buy the "hot pursuit" bull shit. The guy was in the process of a legal activity. So the question remains what other justifiable cause for pursuit was there?

I don't have any "outrage" to have luck with. I have questions, which a rational person looking at a situation such as this should have. Especially one that claims to be a progressive. But apparently questioning police actions only matters when it's not a gun owner involved for folks like yourself. If the person is a gun owner, you could give a shit less if they get capped or not.

Again, your hypocrisy truly knows no bounds.

[MyrnaLoy]

8. legal activity?

Is open carry legal in Philly? Is running from a police officer after he identifies himself legal?

[eqfan592]

9. Open carry is in fact legal in Philly.

As for the officer identifying himself, we still have no details on the sequence of events leading up to it. For all we know, the guy saw somebody running at him with a gun and decided to retreat into his house, and didn't actually hear the officer ID himself.

We simply don't know. But your willingness to accept the officers story without question says a great deal about you.

[MyrnaLoy]

12. so how did it work out for this guy?

LOL

[TPaine7]

14. That's about the extent of your logic, isn't it?

I really hope no enterprising criminal every impersonates a cop to you. Even people who think like you don't deserve the to face the outcome.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

22. this man is in a medically induced coma with sever liver damage

and you are laughing. . . .??

[eqfan592]

23. Wow....

...you're actually laughing at somebody who was shot by a police officer while not in the act of breaking any laws so far as anybody can tell. That's fucking sick, period.

[Bold Lib]

29. I cannot believe you find it funny that this guy was shot for a legal activity. That is

just sick.

[Remmah2]

18. But how did he know the "off duty" non-uniform police office was real?

That seems to be the pivot point of the debate. There have been cases of home invasions in which the criminals have pretended to be police. Nobody seemend to be in immediate danger by the civilian, perhaps the non-uniformed, off duty officer should have called for help, as in a patrol car with actual uniformed police.

In the future when firearms are banned from civilian ownership, any criminal in plain clothing can "say" they are a police officer, pull your car over, gain access to your house, put you in handcuffs then rape, murder or rob you. Just because they identfy themself as a cop.

[Callisto32]

25. You are really hung up on "identifying himself as a police officer."

Anybody can say "STOP, POLICE!"

[TPaine7]

11. It's not that simple.

"If I'm ever asked by a police officer with a gun to do something I do it and let the court sort it out."

Really? What if he wants you to drop face first onto the concrete with your hands behind your back in the name of "officer safety"? What if he wants you to take actions (or inaction) that will allow him to kill an innocent person? What if he wants you to help him catch someone who witnessed him committing a crime so he can kill them? What if he wants sexual favors?

The concept of absolute docility and worshipful obedience to authority figures is not liberal. It's not even conservative in the true conservative tradition. It's fascist.

There's also the fact that literally ANYONE can identify themselves as a police officer. I hope, for your sake, that the next BTK (Bind Torture Kill) thug never identifies himself to you as a cop while dressed in plain clothes as a means of entering your house--by your own words, you would do absolutely ANYTHING he said, I guess until the pain was so intense you reflexively resisted.

If a normal person was in his own front yard and a guy with a gun dressed in moving clothes ran up and claimed to be a police officer, getting as far away as possible doesn't sound unreasonable. I just wish he had locked the door.

Out of all the times people dressed in moving suitable attire ran up to someone in a rough neighborhood in Philly claiming to be a police officer, what percentage were legitimate, in you opinion? Use your imagination. I would imagine that most folks in a tough Philly neighborhood wouldn't automatically assume that the stranger pointing a gun at them was a police officer just because he said so.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

16. re: The concept of absolute docility and worshipful obedience

"The concept of absolute docility and worshipful obedience..." is self-limiting behavior, or at least, evolution at work.

[TPaine7]

13. If the report is true, as conveyed in your source, the officer fled the scene.

That is evidence of guilt per legal theory, it tends to show that he knew he was in the wrong:

"According to reports, the officer told investigators that it was not about a parking space but his spotting a gun in Taylor’s hands. He said that Taylor was fleeing him when he ran into his house. He then reportedly ran back into his relative’s house. It is not clear, if this account is true, why the officer did not call for back up or why he left the scene."

He "ran" back, according to the report. If true, why would he run?

If a mere citizen of the United States of America ran after shooting someone, it would be a big deal. Of course, in most big, corrupt cities, convicting a cop is a herculean task unless he confesses. It easy to see why, with so many people having a "cops deserve our worship" mentality.

[Remmah2]

21. if Taylor was visibly displaying a weapon, the officer was expected to take action.

Like calling for backup.

[friendly_iconoclast]

27. Yeah, about that... From your OWN link, no less:

Note: emphasis added

What is interesting is the immediate statement by Chief Charles Ramsey below that Taylor turned on the officer with a weapon and caused the shooting. For the record, I am co-lead counsel in the World Bank case where Ramsey is being sued for his role in the mass arrest during the IMF/World Bank protests (while he was Chief of Police in Washington). One would have expected a more circumspect statement since the matter is under investigation and witnesses disagree with the officer’s account. In the World Bank case, Ramsey immediately denied accounts of abusive arrests by officers — despite later admissions that hundreds were arrested without probable cause.....

You were saying?

[friendly_iconoclast]

30. BTW, I do not expect a reply. Our 'movie star' tends to ignore inconvenient truths.

The disinterested observer will note that the two biggest pooh-poohers of the coverage of Operation Gunwalker

(and the ATFs subsequent attempts at coverup) quit talking about it when incontravertible

evidence of wrongdoing began to appear from mainstream sources.

[Remmah2]

19. Sounds like a case of profiling.

A civilian has a firearm, therefore they must be a criminal.

I feel so stereotyped.

:sarcasm:

[gejohnston]

24. unless it was in a more affluent part of town.

Then it would be something like "gee Mr. Trump, is that a real Holland and Holland"?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

3. Identified himself.

I wonder if that means he showed a badge or just yelled, "I'm a cop"?

IIRC lots of folks who actually had rather real looking badges worked for Al Capone.

[MyrnaLoy]

5. Oh yeah

that happens a lot



NOT!

[eqfan592]

7. Haha, HAHAHAHA, AAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Oh really now? Doesn't happen a lot? Try googling "people impersonating police officer" and see how many hits you get. Seriously, you seem to exist in an alternate reality from everybody else on this board.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

15. Just because...

...the folks who say "police!" when they catch up to YOU always have a badge, doesn't mean that everyone who says that they are police always are.

[Callisto32]

26. How naive we are today....

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

31. Dare I say...

...yup?

Josh Taylor Shot a bit over 5 weeks ago. No recent follow-up by any local papers. Maybe because of...

Mark Fiorino taking center stage. Assaulted by police 3 weeks and now charged with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct.

I have read numerous articles and letters of opinion and accounts of both incidents. The police in Philly inspire no confidence. They are more likely to tow your car for an expired sticker than to save a life. A department wide attitude of disrespect for individual rights is the root cause. Aggravating this a the idea that the police are "better" than the average citizen. One opinion in particular, I feel, speaks volumes:

It WOULD take someone who's blind in one eye and can't see out the other not to recognize Mark Fiorino's intentions when he sashayed around doing his Wyatt Earp impersonation with his .40-caliber Glock strapped to his hip.

Fiorino accomplished just what he set out to do that day by luring a police sergeant into a heated confrontation while secretly recording his right to bear arms on the open plains. Was the sergeant supposed to just ignore him and head to the nearest Dunkin' Donuts in a city that amasses more than 300 homicides a year? Would the next officer be as accommodating - or shoot first and ask questions later?

It sure didn't take Fiorino long to debut on YouTube and get his face plastered on the front page. He even quoted the police directive when stopped, indicating he knew exactly what he was doing to invite a confrontation. Of course Fiorino will deny all this and sue the city as any other red-blooded opportunist would.

Well, Mr. Fiorino, all I can say is that I hope your 15 minutes of fame does not result in another police officer's death.

Captain Joseph Di Lacqua Philadelphia Police Department

Captain D is not unfamiliar with the area in which this occurred. He used to command the 8th district. Nor is he unfamiliar with the practice of a cover-up. An article about 10 years old on Joe Di Lacqua.

As for the Wyatt Earp reference, IIRC Mr. Earp had charges over collecting fees he failed to turn over, operating a brothel, slapping a prostitute...

Perhaps in Philly the Glock is really on the other hip. ;)

[Remmah2]

20. I wonder???

I wonder what would happen if two off duty cops ran across one another in public? (The assumption is they did not know one another.)

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

28. Another fine example...

...of self-limiting behavior, or at least, evolution at work. ;)

[aikoaiko]

10. More info needed to understand what happened.

I'll wait until more pans out before saying much.

[ileus]

17. If you won't accept the police state you will suffer the consequences.