Clark Co deputy shoots & kills off-duty Vancouver police officer

[Alexx1401]

This makes me think that this video evidence thing may also translate to our situation in terms of protests. Let's say u accidentally drove into a protest. Then let's pretend u had 360 degree video recording via car cams that capture everything. No matter what your actions were (let's assume you took really good actions for the sake of argument though), you have the ability to tell your side of the story and have video to back it up (assuming ur cams caught everything I mean).

Contrast that to having no cams yourself but 10-30 protesters have cams. It's possible that the edited video segments that show u in the worst light will come out and the parts that supports you may well not be shown at all.

One side note/digression is that in Clint Smith's teachings he mentions backing up (a perceived passive action) and many poeple mention verbal commands such as "stop" or "stop, get back" etc which all support you as stopping the attack and the defender vs being an aggressor. FWIW Massad Ayoob and the active self protection guy both have some good videos in this regard, especially in regards to trying to de-escalate, which could help you in court later -especially if others heard it or you have video evidence of it.

I have been real big on dash cams for a LONG time. Like all this tech they are pennies on the dollar what they used to be. Now of course if the driver does something "stupid" it does not help. If driver really is "victim" it can sure make things FAR easier later. The cost of one insurance claim makes MANY wish they had just had one.
If you accidentally drove into one of these places where scum have the road shut down your camera's may well help a lot. Assuming you do try to get out of the situation. Even the cheapie ones I use seem to pick up sound VERY well. If I get out of my vehicle to talk to someone and have the door or window open? Often can hear both sides of the conversation on the tape. Of course the down side is when you are playing some close call or wreck you saw to others and they get you hear you singing along to the music you were playing before. Or in Wife's case the sudden F bombs when something happens right in front of her. That one wreck were two asshats chasing each other passed her on a winding hill, double yellow, and one rolled was requested by LEO's. She was all embarrassed that they were going to hear her. I assured her the people watching the video have heard worse

 

[WillametteWill]

My department started using cameras in vehicles with wireless mics on the deputies in about 1990. Let's put it this way, we had to replace the VCR tape in the trunk during long shifts. I could share pages on the history and mindset from line officers to administrators as it has evolved. Short story is many were fearful that micromanaging supervisors would sit and watch your tapes, trying to catch you doing something wrong. Once it was apparent this wasn't happening, and it saved a few officers during he said / she said encounters with no witnesses, there was pretty much universal acceptance.

Fast forward to the modern era of all digital. Admin loves it when folks come into complain about an officer and spin this yarn of lies. When they are done, the Lt. spins the monitor around to them, hits play, and asks them to let them know when they get to the part where the officer was unprofessional. In nearly all cases it's the complaining party MFing the officer from the get go, and only receiving polite replies from the officer. They leave, tails between their legs. It's great. I actually knew officers who sued complaining parties for slander based on video and their sworn statement that the officer did evil things.

One problem is that video does not see like the human eye, especially in low light conditions. It can prejudice a jury or others when it looks so bright on the 70" big screen. I'm pro-camera but it's a hard sell sometimes getting folks to understand that it is not without issues.

 

[Gunner3456]

The biggest take away seems to be that the deceased should have stayed inside his home instead of trying to confront the suspect and he would still be alive. The second biggest take away is that when you go outside to confront the suspect, don't rely on the suspect complying with your attempt to detain him just because you have a gun. The third takeaway seems to be that if you are attempting to detain someorone and you are in possession of the firearm - distance is your friend, the deceased was stabbed multiple times and lost possession of the firearm at the hands of the suspect - distance was obviously not kept.

The biggest takeaway for me is that when you point a gun at something and pull the trigger you are 100% responsible for what happens.

 

[VanceInWA]

This has been the case for a long time - it isn't something new.

LEOs kill more innocent civilians than armed civilians do - by 2-3X IIRC - by shooting the wrong person. And that stat was decades ago. I can't find it now, but I believe it was in one of the studies by Lott or Kleck?

I would not be surprised if it has gotten worse; LEOs are now trained to fear the appearance of guns a lot more than they used to. It has turned into a shoot first and ask questions later. If civilians adopted that policy we would generally be crucified in court.

Granted, LEOs encounter many more violent criminals than most civilians, that is the nature of their job - and criminals have gotten much more violent.

That doesn't sound correct to say that police kill more innocents than armed civilians, at least based on data available from 2019.

During that year a total of 998 people were killed by police. Of the 998 killed by police, 984 were "justified" with 941 (95.6%) armed assailants, 22 engaged in an attack on the officer (2.2%), and 21 (2.1%) constituting a "threat" to the officer (whatever that means). Only 14 of the police killings in 2019 (1.4%) were deemed to be "unjustified," meaning an innocent person was killed. The most common weapons held by armed people they killed were gun (64.0%), knife (18.6%), vehicle (7.3%), axe/hatchet (1.1%), and 3.2% of those they killed were armed with a toy weapon (although "toy" reported in this category includes air pistols and BB guns).

Of interest: 957 (95.9%) of those killed by police were male, 41 (4.1%) were female, 436 were White (43.7%), 255 were Black (25.6%), and 183 (18.3%) were Hispanic.

 

[Jay Walk]

Wow..... This has gone off the freaking rails

Unless some video surfaces, we will never know why the homeowner and/or Sheriff took the actions that they did.

 

[Alexx1401]

Fast forward to the modern era of all digital. Admin loves it when folks come into complain about an officer and spin this yarn of lies. When they are done, the Lt. spins the monitor around to them, hits play, and asks them to let them know when they get to the part where the officer was unprofessional. In nearly all cases it's the complaining party MFing the officer from the get go, and only receiving polite replies from the officer. They leave, tails between their legs. It's great. I actually knew officers who sued complaining parties for slander based on video and their sworn statement that the officer did evil things.

When Wife asked why the LEO's were so happy to get a copy of that video of the wreck I told her what I suspected they were going to do. Get the guy who was second to pass her, then rolled his car to give a statement on record. Which he of course would make up god only knows what to claim it was not his fault. Then after he signed the statement show him the video of what he did. From that point a guilty plea would be offered that he would of course take, or be told they can take it all to a judge.

 

[American123]

The biggest takeaway for me is that when you point a gun at something and pull the trigger you are 100% responsible for what happens.

In the realm of logical conclusions that is always the case, however, what (if any) consequences come from it seems to always be up to judges, juries, and now more recently and more often, politicized public outcry.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

In the realm of logical conclusions that is always the case, however, what (if any) consequences come from it seems to always be up to judges, juries, and now more recently and more often, politicized public outcry.

Good point. It seems to me there is the objective truth, and then there is the truth as manipulated by the lawyers. That kind of comes down to the individual lawyers and the evidence.

And there is also the political will, or lack of will, depending on the case, to prosecute from the DA. Imo this can be based up to 100% on politics (as we have ample evidence of here in Portland). So knowing the political culture of where we live is important in this regard.

Then there is the jury, where we also really need to take into account where we live. Fe Portland vs a conservative eastern Oregon county. How many typical jury members in Portland would think something like "couldn't you have just talked it out?"; "Did u have to use a gun?"; "why did u have a gun in the first place?" vs. in an eastern county the jurers may think totally differently.

It seems to me the time to think about that stuff is ahead of time, so you can determine what situations u will engage in or not. Just my thinking at the moment. I'm no expert on this stuff but am thankful we have guys like Ayoob and others that have put out a lot of info on the topic.

 

[bbbass]

one thing for certain reading this thread, our trains of thought do not run on the same tracks.

Non-gun owning folks always see gunners as a monolithic group.

One problem is that video does not see like the human eye, especially in low light conditions. It can prejudice a jury or others when it looks so bright on the 70" big screen. I'm pro-camera but it's a hard sell sometimes getting folks to understand that it is not without issues.

Yup, ASP channel mentions this constantly. Not so much about brightness, but that things in the body cam vid are closer than they appear. And that the sightline of the camera is not what the officer's sightline is... IOW the officer may have seen something the camera did not pick up.

Of interest: 957 (95.9%) of those killed by police were male, 41 (4.1%) were female, 436 were White (43.7%), 255 were Black (25.6%), and 183 (18.3%) were Hispanic.

According to the 2020 Census:

• The most prevalent racial or ethnic group for the United States was the White alone non-Hispanic population at 57.8%. This decreased from 63.7% in 2010.
• The Hispanic or Latino population was the second-largest racial or ethnic group, comprising 18.7% of the total population.
• The Black or African American alone non-Hispanic population was the third-largest group at 12.1%.

Therefore, using your stats w/o context proves the claims of systemic racism. (The moral of the story is "be careful how you use stats". And understand how others misuse them.)

Wow..... This has gone off the freaking rails

Rails???

We don need no stinking rails!!!!!

 

[WillametteWill]

Yup, ASP channel mentions this constantly. Not so much about brightness, but that things in the body cam vid are closer than they appear. And that the sightline of the camera is not what the officer's sightline is... IOW the officer may have seen something the camera did not pick up.

ASP had one recently involving lighting where they seemed to be off on the concept with video. I didn't see the original video since they had so many complaints about their analysis that they updated the commentary. It actually directly relates to this thread as an officer shot the homeowner through the window/door, who was inside his house with a gun wondering who was pounding on this door at midnight (apparently officers were sent to the house based on false alarm from a phone app...lesson to us all). Agree with the other points.

We had problems with the early generation videos when field sobriety tests were recorded. They were not able to pick up what the human eye could clearly see in low light. Prosecutors would refuse to file cases because they could not see what actual happened. Fortunately, video is constantly improving.

 

[bbbass]

ASP had one recently involving lighting where they seemed to be off on the concept with video. I didn't see the original video since they had so many complaints about their analysis that they updated the commentary. It actually directly relates to this thread as an officer shot the homeowner through the window/door, who was inside his house with a gun wondering who was pounding on this door at midnight (apparently officers were sent to the house based on false alarm from a phone app...lesson to us all). Agree with the other points.

I saw that one, as well as one or two others where the same thing occurred.

I HATE it when that happens!!!

The lesson I learned is that I may not be able to hear the police announce, nor their commands... therefore,

1. Sidelight windows are a bad idea.
2. Arming up and appearing at a door/window, or peeking thru/around a door/window is risky. Not only with LE, but also against criminals.

I have peepholes because I am too cheap to buy a camera system, but such a system avoids the homeowner approaching a door/window to see what is going on, esp when armed.

(Members, PLEASE do NOT make comments about how a homeowner has a right to be armed in his/her own home... I understand this very well, I'm just advocating for measures that people can take to stay safe while defending their homes!!!)

 

[WillametteWill]

(Members, PLEASE do NOT make comments about how a homeowner has a right to be armed in his/her own home... I understand this very well, I'm just advocating for measures that people can take to stay safe while defending their homes!!!)

Exceptionally valid point! Even if your tombstone says, "But I was right!" you are still lying underneath it.

 

[bkroger86]

Looks like the "shoot first, ask questions later" just happened in Minneapolis. No-knock warrant, police entered and fired on a resident who legally carried for protection: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/03/us/amir-locke-minneapolis-police-shooting.html

Video was released so you can make your own judgement, but if someone kicked down my door in the middle of the night and startled me awake, I'd be reaching for my gun too.

It's open season on firearms owners on their own property.

 

[bbbass]

Looks like the "shoot first, ask questions later" just happened in Minneapolis. No-knock warrant, police entered and fired on a resident who legally carried for protection: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/03/us/amir-locke-minneapolis-police-shooting.html

Video was released so you can make your own judgement, but if someone kicked down my door in the middle of the night and startled me awake, I'd be reaching for my gun too.

It's open season on firearms owners on their own property.

You might want to start a new thread.

 

[User1138]

The homeowner was a LEO, they are not allowed to just "Put people down" anymore.

You mean the way the other cop put the off-duty officer down?

Washington's new laws tie the hands of law enforcement officers
These laws will cause every law enforcement and corrections agency and all its officers to reconsider the way they go about their jobs.

Clearly the law you're referencing had no bearing on the officer who killed the other.

 

[DuckDan]

Sad. Would like to hear more details about the situation but it's just tragic.

Clark County deputy shoots off-duty Vancouver police officer struggling with armed robber

The deputy shot Vancouver police officer Donald Sahota at his home, where he had been fighting the suspect, according to a news release.

www.kgw.com

Lots of burglaries lately as thieves are getting very bold, this one in rainier OR turned out better:

https://www.koin.com/news/crime/osp-rainier-homeowner-shoots-armed-burglar/[/URLdo

http://

Agree. Officer's duty to detain is completely different than for a regular citizen whose top priority may be to avoid/escape, observe and report, or stop an attack (if an attack is occurring). For non LEOs, detaining an armed robbery suspect is probably not high on the list for engagement I would guess. It's a real tragedy as it sounds like the officer was likely trying to assist the sheriff's deputy.

He paid the ultimate price because the Clark County office just started shooting without identifying his target.

 

[Defense Minister]

Essentially we as property owners are going to have to let perps do and take what they want from our property, shops, barns, detached garages, vehicles parked outside and depend on LE to intercede.

Unfortunately, this is probably true in the vast majority of cases, but could very well be the lesser of two evils. However, every one of these situations has unique attributes which could determine different courses of action. If specific circumstances determine that an outside confrontation has become necessary, one thing that the person on the phone with 911 should always do is describe in detail who the "good guy" is, and then insist that the operator relay that info to responding officers. Ideally, this will take place before the "good guy" exits the home.

This is also a very good case for parking one's vehicles in the garage, and hardening entry points of homes and outbuildings. Reinforced locks, doors, and gates, cameras, lighting, dogs, fences, window security film, thorny bushes below windows, etc., and never leave keys or garage door openers in vehicles parked outside.

Welcome to the new (ab)normal…

 

[ilikegunspdx]

More info in this article FYI:

Suspect now facing 4 counts of murder in Vancouver officer’s death

The man who police say robbed an Orchards area convenience store and led Clark County Sheriff’s Office deputies on a chase on Jan. 29, which ended with the death of an off-duty Vancouver Police off…

www.koin.com

 

[Alexx1401]

So 4 counts, I guess that means he will be locked up for what, 6 months?

 

[American123]

More info in this article FYI:

Suspect now facing 4 counts of murder in Vancouver officer’s death

The man who police say robbed an Orchards area convenience store and led Clark County Sheriff’s Office deputies on a chase on Jan. 29, which ended with the death of an off-duty Vancouver Police off…

www.koin.com

View attachment 1132599
View attachment 1132597
View attachment 1132610
View attachment 1132596
View attachment 1132600

Video evidence, no trial needed, rope, done. Things would be a lot simpler in "my" town.