"What I do know is that police leaders and trainers should study this case and craft policy that is cemented with real-life training scenarios - to prepare for when their officers and supervisors are faced with a similar situation."
And this is why I always defer to Daniel Carr on UOF scenarios. He is the best umpire out there.
If the threat had been in any way credible, the victim would have been charged with terroristic threats. But he only was actually reported for suicidal/ homicidal ideation. His mom was worried and the cops broke into his home and shot him.
Not sure how long SWAT was on scene attempting to communicate but we have had some last 24 hours or more before disengagement or entry. Other options such as a breach w a bearcat or using CS didn’t seem to be considered. We have pulled back and used a team to observe and follow the suspect and later apprehension in similar circumstances. They are tough calls for leadership.
In Warren versus District of Columbia as well as several other cases heard by the Supreme court, that court has ruled that police have no duty to protect the general public outside of a special relationship with the subject. That didn't exist here. We can what if all day long but the bottom line is that I believe the police should have disengaged. If the parents then stated they wanted to make access and they wanted police to stand by that might be a different subject but that didn't happen here. I'm seeing a lawsuit from the parents.
Perfect statement:
"What I do know is that police leaders and trainers should study this case and craft policy that is cemented with real-life training scenarios - to prepare for when their officers and supervisors are faced with a similar situation."
And this is why I always defer to Daniel Carr on UOF scenarios. He is the best umpire out there.
If the threat had been in any way credible, the victim would have been charged with terroristic threats. But he only was actually reported for suicidal/ homicidal ideation. His mom was worried and the cops broke into his home and shot him.
Not sure how long SWAT was on scene attempting to communicate but we have had some last 24 hours or more before disengagement or entry. Other options such as a breach w a bearcat or using CS didn’t seem to be considered. We have pulled back and used a team to observe and follow the suspect and later apprehension in similar circumstances. They are tough calls for leadership.
In Warren versus District of Columbia as well as several other cases heard by the Supreme court, that court has ruled that police have no duty to protect the general public outside of a special relationship with the subject. That didn't exist here. We can what if all day long but the bottom line is that I believe the police should have disengaged. If the parents then stated they wanted to make access and they wanted police to stand by that might be a different subject but that didn't happen here. I'm seeing a lawsuit from the parents.