Women Shot By Cops After Committed String Of Thefts, Police Say

[Orion Rules]

@Just AnotherPerson :

God they acted like it was a national security threat stop. Good Lord. Something is wrong with our system. It was theft, not a national security issue. Darn.

JAP, the suspects traveled a long way to pull this off. The car they occupied was put into reverse toward an officer on foot in pursuit who discharged a weapon in self-defense. A police officer has a right to self-defense. The suspects seem to be at fault for what occurred. A vehicle can be a deadly weapon.


[...] San Mateo Police detectives investigating the criminal activity of the suspects leading up to the critical incident determined both suspects flew to Los Angeles from Philadelphia on the afternoon of September 26, 2019. [...]

Over the course of 48 hours after landing in Los Angeles, leading up to the officer involved incident, the suspects committed a series of theft related crimes in at least 11 locations in Southern California and the Bay Area, of which at least 9 were shopping malls and/or retail stores.

[...] the suspect vehicle drove toward an oncoming police vehicle and then reversed toward an officer on foot. The officer on foot discharged his service weapon striking the two occupants in the vehicle. [...]

[Dr. Who]

@Just AnotherPerson :

JAP, the suspects traveled a long way to pull this off. The car they occupied was put into reverse toward an officer on foot in pursuit who discharged a weapon in self-defense. A police officer has a right to self-defense. The suspects seem to be at fault for what occurred. A vehicle can be a deadly weapon.


[...] San Mateo Police detectives investigating the criminal activity of the suspects leading up to the critical incident determined both suspects flew to Los Angeles from Philadelphia on the afternoon of September 26, 2019. [...]

Over the course of 48 hours after landing in Los Angeles, leading up to the officer involved incident, the suspects committed a series of theft related crimes in at least 11 locations in Southern California and the Bay Area, of which at least 9 were shopping malls and/or retail stores.

[...] the suspect vehicle drove toward an oncoming police vehicle and then reversed toward an officer on foot. The officer on foot discharged his service weapon striking the two occupants in the vehicle. [...]

Nevertheless, they were shoplifting. Not a violent crime, nor a reason for a police chase. Spot them and follow them back to the airport and block the vehicle in the parking lot. Take them into custody and charge them. Then it wouldn't have made the news because that's how most of these cases are dealt with in most jurisdictions. No police chase and no shooting.

[Orion Rules]

Nevertheless, they were shoplifting. Not a violent crime, nor a reason for a police chase. Spot them and follow them back to the airport and block the vehicle in the parking lot. Take them into custody and charge them. Then it wouldn't have made the news because that's how most of these cases are dealt with in most jurisdictions. No police chase and no shooting.

The driver of a stolen car made the big mistake of backing up on an officer in pursuit by foot. A car is a deadly weapon. They were evading arrest for a string of robberies. The officer had a right to defend his ground and fellow officers. A high-speed chase to the airport involves more potential victims. The disaster would have never been lived down.

[FindersKeepers]

I certainly agree with that. Additionally, what kind of protocols allow for this kind of over the top response to shoplifting, even if it's a repeating pattern? At most this is petty theft. Yes, you want to catch shoplifters. They cost us all a great deal of money, but this is not a violent crime. If you are the police, you want to identify them and connect them with the theft but not at all costs. No one's life is in danger. This represents a disconnect between the crime and the response. How do these officers call this in and get the OK to engage in a police chase with back up on a shoplifting report? There is a problem with this police department.

It's overreach to be sure. The same thing happens when an officer tries to pull over a car for a minor infraction and the driver flees, prompting a full-speed chase that ends up killing the driver, officer, or a bystander.

I think most departments now have rules about when to pursue and when not to pursue, but to me, events like that trigger an "I'm going to get the $#@! at all costs," mentality, which overcomes common sense. And some people just do not make good decisions under that sort of pressure. I mean -- I don't think those officers start the day thinking they'll end up shooting a shoplifter or pursuing a kid on a joy ride that ends killing someone -- they just don't have the mental wherewithal to make a better decision under the circumstances. I believe we need to pay officers more so we get more applicants and we can weed out the lukewarm candidates who end up doing something like this.

There's a good reason Andy Griffith only let Deputy Barney Fife carry a single bullet in his shirt pocket.

[Standing Wolf]

The driver of a stolen car made the big mistake of backing up on an officer in pursuit by foot. A car is a deadly weapon. They were evading arrest for a string of robberies. The officer had a right to defend his ground and fellow officers. A high-speed chase to the airport involves more potential victims. The disaster would have never been lived down.

The last is pure speculation, and most police agencies have strict rules concerning high speed chases. Many also have rules about officers putting themselves in harm's way - like standing in front of (or, in this case, in back of) a moving vehicle and then using deadly force against the occupants instead of getting out of the way.

[Just AnotherPerson]

@Just AnotherPerson :

JAP, the suspects traveled a long way to pull this off. The car they occupied was put into reverse toward an officer on foot in pursuit who discharged a weapon in self-defense. A police officer has a right to self-defense. The suspects seem to be at fault for what occurred. A vehicle can be a deadly weapon.


[...] San Mateo Police detectives investigating the criminal activity of the suspects leading up to the critical incident determined both suspects flew to Los Angeles from Philadelphia on the afternoon of September 26, 2019. [...]

Over the course of 48 hours after landing in Los Angeles, leading up to the officer involved incident, the suspects committed a series of theft related crimes in at least 11 locations in Southern California and the Bay Area, of which at least 9 were shopping malls and/or retail stores.

[...] the suspect vehicle drove toward an oncoming police vehicle and then reversed toward an officer on foot. The officer on foot discharged his service weapon striking the two occupants in the vehicle. [...]

Thank you for taking the time to post that information Orion. Although I don't agree with you that it was self defense. I do appreciate your opinion, what you have to say does matter, and is valuable. Thank you for that Orion.

[Orion Rules]

The last is pure speculation, and most police agencies have strict rules concerning high speed chases. Many also have rules about officers putting themselves in harm's way - like standing in front of (or, in this case, in back of) a moving vehicle and then using deadly force against the occupants instead of getting out of the way.

How could the officer have controlled what the suspect(s) driving the car did? They traveled from Philadelphia to Los Angeles to commit a string of crimes you were not a victim of. The police surrounded the suspects to stop them from causing more harm to the communities they already took from, in a string of robberies, not 'just' shoplifting from one location, but numerous locations, as they try to flee, potentially harming more persons, including a police officer.

The officers did their job, as you feel the situation the suspects were in was the police officers' fault. If they had a gun and shot at the officers, it is still the police officers' fault for getting too close. How many more persons were to accomodate their safety over their own? A car is a deadly weapon. Backing up on a cop using a deadly weapon is not smart when you know you will be held accountable trying to pull it off.

[Tahuyaman]

A few years back, one of my fellow officers pulled over speeder. The driver had no warrants which caused concern. My buddy walked up to the car, contacted the driver the way you're supposed to and was shot in the face and killed.

[Standing Wolf]

A few years back, one of my fellow officers pulled over speeder. The driver had no warrants which caused concern. My buddy walked up to the car, contacted the driver the way you're supposed to and was shot in the face and killed.

That's horrible and tragic, but how does it relate to the case under discussion?

[Tahuyaman]

That's horrible and tragic, but how does it relate to the case under discussion?

Because that's what is going through a police officers mind when he's apprehending someone.