I'm glad to see you've come around to my thoughts on this situation. That fence is not an insurmountable object, not to the justification for the use of force nor, in the officers point of view based on what they knew at that exact moment, to the suspect himself. It was a flimsy fence, it was at best 4 ft high, the officers had rushed directly up to the fence and earlier video had shown the subject reaching 3 ft over that fence to swing the knife at his grandfather who responded with, wait for it, wait for it... deadly force by striking him in the head with a log! If we can't fault the grandfather then why would we fault police? The grandfather was well aware of his infirmities and his condition, the police were not. Not only were the police having to deal with action versus reaction, the subject suddenly jumping up and charging at them and him being able to clear that distance in one or two seconds, there were also two other people inside of that fence line. Of course, we never know what's going to happen with uninvestigation particularly a high-profile situation like this where there's a lot of speculation and what ifs, but the way I see this is that under the circumstances known to the officers at the time, this was justified. When you add in the fact that all four officers fired nearly simultaneously that tells us that all four officers on scene perceived the exact same threat at nearly the exact same time and reacted the exact same way. It doesn't get much more reasonable officer standard than that.
It's a shame that the young man in question got killed, however when a situation with people in immediate danger of being harmed by somebody with a weapon officers will act upon how they were taught. The laws of the State of Idaho did give these officers the clearance to stop the threat, which is what a big part of their job is.
In a mental health crisis situation it should be made clear to dispatch so that they can get the people on scene that are needed.
If a weapon is mentioned in any part of the call the officers will already be on high alert, and somebody who does not drop a knife, gun or any weapon in general when ordered to does fall into a category that often necessitates use of force.
I must respectfully disagree with the prevailing narrative. As a parent of two teenagers with autism, I believe my perspective is relevant to this case. First and foremost, I doubt that the officers involved received Autism First Responders Training. Secondly, there were no attempts by the officers to de-escalate the situation. Instead, they quickly exited their cars and shot Victor Perez in less than 20 seconds.
In a similar incident that occurred near my hometown years ago, the police employed de-escalation techniques. However, in this case, that approach was not taken.
In light of these circumstances, I firmly believe that the officers involved should be removed from the force and prosecuted for murder charges.
Then the agency needs to mandate the training. If anything it needs to be implemented as law If the officers would of stopped just for a moment then this situation might of not transpire. I highly recommend that you educate yourself on autism before making such a statement. If someone is not understanding an officers request their could be other issues at play. I have a lot of respect for law enforcement, however I will not defend the officers in this situation.
Also take into the consideration nobody had time to tell the officer that Victor had autism. They literally got out of their cars said their commands and gunned him down. It was called reacting before taking a moment to look at the situation.
Idaho has a reputation for pretty lousy cops. I’m across the border and we love our sheriffs deputies but the people over in Idaho really resent theirs. Adams county especially.
I'm glad to see you've come around to my thoughts on this situation. That fence is not an insurmountable object, not to the justification for the use of force nor, in the officers point of view based on what they knew at that exact moment, to the suspect himself. It was a flimsy fence, it was at best 4 ft high, the officers had rushed directly up to the fence and earlier video had shown the subject reaching 3 ft over that fence to swing the knife at his grandfather who responded with, wait for it, wait for it... deadly force by striking him in the head with a log! If we can't fault the grandfather then why would we fault police? The grandfather was well aware of his infirmities and his condition, the police were not. Not only were the police having to deal with action versus reaction, the subject suddenly jumping up and charging at them and him being able to clear that distance in one or two seconds, there were also two other people inside of that fence line. Of course, we never know what's going to happen with uninvestigation particularly a high-profile situation like this where there's a lot of speculation and what ifs, but the way I see this is that under the circumstances known to the officers at the time, this was justified. When you add in the fact that all four officers fired nearly simultaneously that tells us that all four officers on scene perceived the exact same threat at nearly the exact same time and reacted the exact same way. It doesn't get much more reasonable officer standard than that.
It's a shame that the young man in question got killed, however when a situation with people in immediate danger of being harmed by somebody with a weapon officers will act upon how they were taught. The laws of the State of Idaho did give these officers the clearance to stop the threat, which is what a big part of their job is.
In a mental health crisis situation it should be made clear to dispatch so that they can get the people on scene that are needed.
If a weapon is mentioned in any part of the call the officers will already be on high alert, and somebody who does not drop a knife, gun or any weapon in general when ordered to does fall into a category that often necessitates use of force.
When I first heard about this case, what immediately came to mind is the SCOTUS case Kisela v. Hughes (2018), which also involved a knife and a fence.
I must respectfully disagree with the prevailing narrative. As a parent of two teenagers with autism, I believe my perspective is relevant to this case. First and foremost, I doubt that the officers involved received Autism First Responders Training. Secondly, there were no attempts by the officers to de-escalate the situation. Instead, they quickly exited their cars and shot Victor Perez in less than 20 seconds.
In a similar incident that occurred near my hometown years ago, the police employed de-escalation techniques. However, in this case, that approach was not taken.
In light of these circumstances, I firmly believe that the officers involved should be removed from the force and prosecuted for murder charges.
Here’s my question.
The officers were not informed that it was a teenager with autism.
Are they supposed to be psychic?
The call stated it was a “man with a knife”.
If the officers didn’t have training that you think they should - who’s fault is that?
- The agency coordinates training. Not individual cops.
Then the agency needs to mandate the training. If anything it needs to be implemented as law If the officers would of stopped just for a moment then this situation might of not transpire. I highly recommend that you educate yourself on autism before making such a statement. If someone is not understanding an officers request their could be other issues at play. I have a lot of respect for law enforcement, however I will not defend the officers in this situation.
Yes.
Police were told that a drunk guy with a knife was trying to stab people. That’s an immediate deadly threat.
So they responded to that information.
They did tell him “drop the knife” multiple times. He didn’t listen. What magic words could they have said to stop him? Please. Explain.
I agree that cops need more training.
But. You are ignoring the larger issue.
The police were NOT told it was a teenager with autism. They had no way to know that. Police are not psychic. So how would extra training have helped?
The call was about a guy with a knife. They see a guy w a knife. And he comes at them.
Also take into the consideration nobody had time to tell the officer that Victor had autism. They literally got out of their cars said their commands and gunned him down. It was called reacting before taking a moment to look at the situation.
No one had time?
Please. Read my article again. The time to tell police is before they arrive. Not as they are dealing with a guy who has a knife.
That is why the family should:
1) call police & explain the situation.
2) get everyone out of danger.
My goal is a different outcome. But. If all you do blame cops who are thrust into an awful situation - we will get no where.
There was a fense dividing and less than lethal force should of been implemented along with De-escalating techniques.
Maybe.
But a guy with a knife was coming at them.
He had just tried to stab multiple people - that were only a few feet away from him.
The police did use less lethal A bean bag shotgun was fired & it didn’t work
And Again Police were told it was a drunk guy with a knife
•It’s to tell cops how to handle a guy with a knife who’s coming at them - from the safety of your home.
What about taser as interim step preceding deadly force?
Tasers are a great tool. But fail 40% of the time. So, not recommended v. a guy with a knife.
Tasers are for unarmed & uncooperative suspects.
Idaho has a reputation for pretty lousy cops. I’m across the border and we love our sheriffs deputies but the people over in Idaho really resent theirs. Adams county especially.