Oklahoma cop indicted for murder after allegedly firing 60 rounds

[Alexx1401]

Oklahoma cop indicted for murder after allegedly firing 60 rounds, killing road-rage suspect

An Oklahoma police officer was indicted last week for murder after he allegedly fired nearly 60 rounds at a road-rage suspect earlier this year.

www.foxnews.com

I have to hope there is more to this story? Anyone here hear any more about this? I read it twice and it leaves me thinking WTF? She is shooting at people and fleeing, Police shoot her, now Police charged with killing her?

Read More

 

[slimmer13]

I'd imagine that the argument is that he stopped the threat with the initial shots, yet continued to fire including a mag change when the now deceased was no longer a threat.

 

[Alexx1401]

I'd imagine that the argument is that he stopped the threat with the initial shots, yet continued to fire including a mag change when the now deceased was no longer a threat.

If that is really all there is here I have to hope whoever brought this case is fired.

 

[L84Cabo]

Note how the media calls this a "road rage" situation. That's B.S. It wasn't a road rage situation it was an ACTIVE SHOOTER situation who was highly mobile in a truck. The fact that this nut didn't kill anyone is both lucky and amazing. But it was due mostly to the fact that the cop put her down before she could.

My understanding was that the officer was firing rounds at her through his vehicle windshield which likely accounts for the high round count. I have no idea what the "down range" conditions were when the officer was shooting but nobody else was apparently hit so it would seem that the officer took appropriate caution. Note too that he was cleared by his internal affairs dept.

You tell me...you've got some crazy person driving their vehicle shooting up the town at random. How would you stop something like that? Or would you just let them keep driving and shooting until they ran out of gas or bullets?

My suspicion is the officer did what needed to be done and is the victim of an over zealous, anti cop D.A. But we'll see what facts come out as this thing progresses.

 

[The Heretic]

Doesn't say why the officer was brought up on charges?

 

[MannyGlocks]

Probably, just another victimized felon trying to blow off a little steam and gets smoked for it - poor dear.

 

[zenbreath]

Based on the article, shooting her was justified and necessary.

It wouldn't surprise me if their were other factors, known to the locals, that didnt appear in this story.

 

[CoastRange57]

This brings to mind this situation, which certainly seems precedent to me. The officer got the job done and went home. That is what counts.

 

[revjen45]

1) How many of the shots thru the windshield hit what was aimed at?
Not to rag on the cop, but it seems like shooting thru the windshield at another vehicle with both in motion is a good way to endanger a lot of uninvolved people.
2) will he ever be able to hear anything again?

 

[Jonnyuma]

1) How many of the shots thru the windshield hit what was aimed at?
Not to rag on the cop, but it seems like shooting thru the windshield at another vehicle with both in motion is a good way to endanger a lot of uninvolved people.
2) will he ever be able to hear anything again?

That was my first thought when I read this story a couple hrs ago.
Shooting through the windshield seems (from my couch) to be unnecessary and possibly even reckless. But that's pretty dang far from Murder 2. If the only one injured or killed was the perp then no harm/no foul, IMO.

Lt Mitchell, don't do that anymore.
(Huh?)
Go back to work.
Dismissed.
The End

 

[Rickenbacher39]

60 rounds?
Hmmm.
Well, he certainly was determined.

That was like me at the range yesterday; "I can't stop shooting, I still have cartridges left"......

 

[RVTECH]

"Mitchell gets in behind her. He took his AR-15 and he started shooting through the front windshield at her."

Correct me if I am missing something but this part of the story clearly states Mitchell was 'behind' her and he 'started shooting through the front windshield at her.'

SO, since he was 'behind her' he must have been shooting through the windshield of his OWN vehicle at her while she was fleeing. So with the 'exchanging gunfire' part was the suspect shooting over her shoulder at Mitchell who was 'behind' her?

If this is the case (based on what the story states) then this may have not been the correct (or justified) thing to do - not to mention very safe for his partner or himself.

Again I am only interpreting this on the what the story clearly states.

 

[mkwerx]

Cops have been trained more often to shoot through their windshield in certain circumstances, so I don't have an issue with this. If you have a fleeing felon who is mobile, and they are taking shots at pursuing police - shooting them may be the best course of action. There is a method taught of resting the rifle on the dash, firing with one hand while driving with the other. Its pretty much point shooting, but can be quite successful, especially given the light recoil of an AR.

 

[zenbreath]

The fact that no bystanders were hit by any of the 60 rounds indicates that he was picking and choosing when to shoot and when not to.

 

[MannyGlocks]

Awhile back, while at the my outdoor range, I forgot to re-install my in ear plugs and range muffs over them.

My ears needed a rest from them while I reloaded, put up some new targets, drank some water, etc.

Now, ready to shoot again, but I was so comfortable I forgot I was ear 'nekkid'.

I shot once (9mm) and was, of course, immediately deafened.

Remember, I was outdoors.

Shooting a pistol or rifle in a vehicle?

Tinnitus here I come...or deafened indefinitely...

 

[Alexx1401]

Awhile back, while at the my outdoor range, I forgot to re-install my in ear plugs and range muffs over them.

My ears needed a rest from them while I reloaded, put up some new targets, drank some water, etc.

Now, ready to shoot again, but I was so comfortable I forgot I was ear 'nekkid'.

I shot once (9mm) and was, of course, immediately deafened.

Remember, I was outdoors.

Shooting a pistol or rifle in a vehicle?

Tinnitus here I come...or deafened indefinitely...

Thankfully it really is not that bad. Police shoot people now and then in a building or home. Often in places that are even tighter. They don't have to go out on disability. I used a 12Ga shorty shotgun in a very small space one time. At the time I did not feel or notice the recoil and feel or notice the blast. Hours later when all calmed down I did have some ringing still. By next day I could tell nothing. From what others who have had to shoot told me they had the same experience. Did not notice the recoil or blast at the time. It's of course far different when shooting at paper. When it's for real your brain just does not seem to register it.

 

[bbbass]

Doesn't say why the officer was brought up on charges?

Hints that the Grand Jury had a problem with the high round count.

This brings to mind this situation, which certainly seems precedent to me. The officer got the job done and went home. That is what counts.

I had the same thought... it seems unusual at first blush, but not unheard of.... As I mentioned in another thread, I've trained on shooting thru windshield to see what the deflection is (from the inside it is down, into the roadway)... once the shots blast a hole to shoot thru, IMO a braced on the dash AR is better than a handgun fired with the offhand out the side window!!! What I know is that "I" will never have to do that...

 

[MannyGlocks]

Alexx,

Glad to hear it!

Now, that you mention it, pre-tinnitus/deafness, I did a lot of non-ear pro shooting without noticing either sound or recoil when I had a live target to shoot at.

Punching holes in paper though, I notice both...

 

[Alexx1401]

Alexx,

Glad to hear it!

Now, that you mention it, pre-tinnitus/deafness, I did a lot of non-ear pro shooting without noticing either sound or recoil when I had a live target to shoot at.

Punching holes in paper though, I notice both...

Yep obviously don't want to make a habit of shooting with no protection but, if you have to shoot for real you most likely will not even notice or remember the blast or suffer from it later. Totally different when shooting at paper as no Adrenalin I guess.

 

[mkwerx]

Alexx,

Glad to hear it!

Now, that you mention it, pre-tinnitus/deafness, I did a lot of non-ear pro shooting without noticing either sound or recoil when I had a live target to shoot at.

Punching holes in paper though, I notice both...

Biology is a strange, but cool thing. Our bodies react to real stress vs induced in a different way - you get auditory exclusion with the real deal. The sense of time slowing or speeding up. Super human strength in some occasions. Crazy stuff!