cking Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 ATLANTA (AP) - The niece of a 92-year-old woman shot to death by police said her aunt likely had reason to shoot three narcotics investigators as they stormed her house. Police insisted the officers did everything right before entering the home Tuesday evening, despite suggestions from the woman's neighbors and relatives that it was a case of mistaken identity. The woman, Kathryn Johnston, was the only resident in the house at the time and had lived there for about 17 years, Assistant Chief Alan Dreher said. The officers had a legal warrant, "knocked and announced" before they forced open the door and were justified in shooting once fired upon, he said. Sarah Dozier, the niece, told WAGA-TV that there were never drugs at the house. My aunt was in good health. I'm sure she panicked when they kicked that door down," Dozier said. "There was no reason they had to go in there and shoot her down like a dog." As the plainclothes Atlanta police officers approached the house about 7 p.m., a woman inside started shooting, striking each of them, said Officer Joe Cobb, a police spokesman. One was hit in the arm, another in a thigh and the third in a shoulder. The officers were taken to a hospital for treatment, and all three were conscious and alert, police said. Rev. Markel Hutchins, a civil rights leader, said Johnston's family deserves an apology. "Of the police brutality cases we've had, this is the most egregious because of the woman's age," Hutchins said. Hutchins said he would try to meet with Atlanta Police Chief Richard Pennington and would also meet with lawyers. One part says they knocked then kicked down door, the other parts says they were shot as they approached. Wonder which really happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p99shooter Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Things like this happen more often than you'd think, and the perpetrators of the injustice end up with "paid administrative leave" or "early retirement with full pension" instead of what should really happen: 25 to life. And another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronEqualizer Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 She nailed three of them before they got her.............damn.........I wonder what her USPSA number was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interceptor Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Since there can be no rebuttal, I request that this thread be closed if it's just going to bash the police based on media reports and not first hand accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Closing would probably be a good thing... I recall seeing a couple of cases here in Austin, now, where they've done investigations, and then refuse to release the details. While I don't feel that anything wrong occurred, based on what I knew of the cases, it does tend to give one the feeling that something untoward is going on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p99shooter Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Closing would probably be a good thing... I recall seeing a couple of cases here in Austin, now, where they've done investigations, and then refuse to release the details. While I don't feel that anything wrong occurred, based on what I knew of the cases, it does tend to give one the feeling that something untoward is going on... Yep, close it down. Can't have us "civilians" having a discussion about police brutality. Who knows? We might organize and do something about it. Remember folks, police have no *legal* obligation to protect you. Just ask Jessica Gonzales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougCarden Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Since I am a shooter first.... and a cop second , I would rather talk about shooting on this forum. We can talk about this stuff on another forum...since we know only cops make mistakes in real life........ DougC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Based on the information we have I would guess the police followed procedure and the 92 year old woman did what seemed prudent to protect herself from a home invasion. The solution which prevents these tragedies gets into a political discussion of the "War on Drugs" which has no place here so I would suggest we cast no blame and close this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Heiter Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 I seriously doubt that any of the officers set out to kill or even harass a sweet little 92 year old woman. Likewise, I'm sure that even if she was the center of drug activity for the state, I doubt they wanted to kill her. Both parties it seems took what they thought was prudent action based on the information they had available at the time. It's unfortunate all the way around and I hate that it happened and it scares me that it could happen to someone I know and love but sometimes shit happens. There's no such thing as an unavoidable accident if you allow for hindsight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interceptor Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 (edited) Closing would probably be a good thing... I recall seeing a couple of cases here in Austin, now, where they've done investigations, and then refuse to release the details. While I don't feel that anything wrong occurred, based on what I knew of the cases, it does tend to give one the feeling that something untoward is going on... Yep, close it down. Can't have us "civilians" having a discussion about police brutality. Who knows? We might organize and do something about it. Remember folks, police have no *legal* obligation to protect you. Just ask Jessica Gonzales. My problem is not with "civilians" talking about this, but posting accusatory remarks in an area of the forum where someone with an alternate opinion, like myself, is not allowed to comment. I don't disapprove of transparency in law enforcement and criminal justice, I just HATE it when people form opinions without all, or nearly all the facts. And I am a police officer if you were wondering. And just food for thought, do you realize how many unemployed drug dealers live and leach off of there unknowing, innocent grandparents and relatives. I doubt that the 92yoa lady was dealing drugs out of the house she lived in for 17 years, but there is a possibility that someone who was dealing was living there, and just happened to not be there when they served the warrant. If we want to discuss this over PM, I'm available. Edited November 22, 2006 by Interceptor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viggen Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 By all means let's close this down. Can't let folks think that cops would ever screw up and do a lot of bad things, if they did. Better to not discuss or disclose and keep it all hush, hush. Just can't trust those tax payers with the facts - whatever they may be. And if facts aren't released, well then it never happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p99shooter Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 I make mistakes too, but people don't get killed when I do. Have you read the any of the links I've provided? They stories almost make me want to cry, and it happens all the time. If you have a job where folks die when you make a mistake, then you should own up to it and the penalty should fit the crime. Hell, when surgeons botch stuff, they lose their jobs and get their pants sued off. When cops make mistakes, they rarely get prosecuted, don't get convicted, the evidents gets covered up (excerpt from one of my links): To make matters worse, the California Supreme Court ruled last week, 6-1, that "the public may not have access to police discipline records filed during administrative appeals, including the names of officers who have been terminated, unless the officers waive their rights to privacy," according to a Times report. ...and at the end of it all still have their jobs and their pensions. In Sacramento, a sherrif's deputy who had the hots for some woman went into her house when she wasn't home. He knocked on her door, and told her terrified child that there was an intruder in the house. The officer went into the woman's bedroom, where he rummaged through her panties, and took a few of them as souvineers. Her was actually fired, but the city public workers boad declared that he had to be re-instated as a peace office. We have a convicted criminal in the Sacramento area wearing a bad and a gun. Why? It doesn't matter if I wasn't their first-hand to witness this 92 year old get slaughtered; there have been enough incidents and enough evidence gathered to point to a continuing, non-isolated pattern of abuse. I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable, but there is no denying it. I'm not making any personal attacks against any officers, but I will not relent on this; there is a problem that needs to be addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougCarden Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Wow..... Guys, this is not the forum to have this discussion. Everyone can have their own opinion, but not on this SHOOTING Forum...... DougC PS I am available by PM as well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cking Posted November 22, 2006 Author Share Posted November 22, 2006 I was just hoping somewhere somebody had access to more data. Because the two sides seem miles apart. Don't police do any covert monitoring of suspected drug sites. Seems like it would be safer for everybody is somebody at least did a watch on the site for awhile. That way you at least know if you had one suspect or 20 when serving the warrant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim James Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Based on the information we have I would guess the police followed procedure and the 92 year old woman did what seemed prudent to protect herself from a home invasion. The solution which prevents these tragedies gets into a political discussion of the "War on Drugs" which has no place here so I would suggest we cast no blame and close this. AikiDale got it. They both did the right thing given their information at the time. If the 92-year-old were still alive, I don't think she should have to face charges, just like the cops won't. Both parties acted as reasonable individuals would in this situation.The problem is in the system: having to knock down the door in drug raids so they can get the evidence before it's destroyed. That is what leads to these no-win situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putty Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Thanks website designers for adding the "Ignore User" feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 If they were plainclothes and knocking down doors and in policy... I'm sorry but (if true) that's a pretty stupid policy. If the lady blasted away at uniformed cops is one thing. Plainclothes cops busting down doors and getting shot is another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Pretty salty shooting for a 92 year old. Hell, pretty salty shooting for almost anyone. Having read through the available "news reports", I'm curious which way this went down. Was the no-knock executed and then the old gal drilled three idiots with five shots, or was the "departments second (of two) official stories" correct and the old woman went five for five on three targets and THEN they excuted the no-knock? Sounds like a good stage to me. I've set up stages using Ayoob Files before Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pdoyle Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Graham v. Connor What would a reasonable officer in that position do...after knock and announce...get fired on...well sounds like it might be reasonable to shoot back....On the Gonzales case you are comparing apples to oranges....totally diferent case with seperate circumstances dealing with the issue of domestic violence and restraining orders, whole new chapter of discussion. Please feel free to call you local police of sheriff's department and inquire about the use of a ride along program, civilian academy, or reserve academy. It is easy to "bash" on everyone in the responsibility name game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDean Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 From our host's "Forum Guidelines" Intent : This Forum is for firearm, technique, and conceptual discussions pertaining to training and competition. (And various unrelated topics.) While the occasional defensive shooting post is not prohibited, in general, defensive shooting discussions or debates are discouraged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p99shooter Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 (edited) Graham v. ConnorWhat would a reasonable officer in that position do...after knock and announce...get fired on...well sounds like it might be reasonable to shoot back.... What would a reasonalble citizen do, when attacked in their home by armed people who may or may not have clearly identified themselves as police? Edited to add: Remeber, we are talking about a 92 year old here. How good do you think your hearing will be when you're 92? I'll probably be deaf if I reach that age. And the police knew that there was a 92 year old woman in that house. Like AikiDale said, this goes back to reasonableness of the "knock and announce" tactic. Someone is responsible for this, yet what will happen? Will the police lose their jobs? The DA? The judge? Unlikely. This is not a black and white situation, but when people die like that, there HAS to be accountability. We can't just through up our hands and say, "oh well, it was a lose-lose situation." Edited November 22, 2006 by p99shooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HI5-O Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 A little information is a dangerous thing barry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pdoyle Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 "may or may not identified themselves" I believe that this is the crux of this explanation. If they did ID themselves, then what?. If no announcement was made, and I can absolutley gaurantee you that no judge in the 9th circuit, is ,going to sign on a no knock warrant for narcotics, then this is definately an issue. I have been personally involved in many, many entries, and on one where a homicide suspect, was shot while armed with a AR-180, he later stated he was afraid he was being robbed, and that is why he went to door with rifle. If this is the trend, and it has been like that on numerous occasions, what are people on either side to do... the citizens or police........i entirely agree that any time a police officer discharges his firearm in the line of duty it should be scrutinized, to the highest degree, but by professionals, not blood in the water attorneys looking for out of court settlements, or suggested experts in the public media. If the oficers are entirely to blame than what they get is exactly what they deserve, until then though....... One last thing I would like to offer, is that if you still have questions in the judgement of the officers shootings, maybe look into the training files and see if they have performed any force on force trainig with any mediums, such as Simmun itions, paint ball, or air soft. If given a chance you should try to get involved in this training and sit back afterwards and see where you may have made mistakes, cause there will be several, and given the totallity of the circumstances, they might have cost a life if used in the real world. I fapprciate your candor and honestly love to discuss these issues with anyone..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
38supPat Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 She nailed three of them before they got her.............damn.........I wonder what her USPSA number was. L00001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cking Posted November 22, 2006 Author Share Posted November 22, 2006 ReRead article, One line says they were shot as they approached. Another implys after they kick the door down. " Assistant Chief Alan Dreher said. The officers had a legal warrant, "knocked and announced" before they forced open the door and were justified in shooting once fired upon, he said." "As the plainclothes Atlanta police officers approached the house about 7 p.m., a woman inside started shooting, striking each of them, said Officer Joe Cobb, a police spokesman." So two different stories, coming from the police. Not a good sign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts