Killing of Teen by Stray Police Bullet Was Tragic, But Not Every Tragedy Demands

[SVPete]

Killing of Teen by Stray Police Bullet Was Tragic, But Not Every Tragedy Demands a Change in the Law

https://pjmedia.com/uncategorized/jack-dunphy/2021/12/28/killing-of-innocent-teen-girl-by-stray-police-bullet-was-tragic-but-not-every-tragedy-demands-a-change-in-the-law-n1545122

Let’s put the racial grievance talk aside and examine what actually happened, which is presented in an LAPD video summary. On Dec. 23, at about 11:50 a.m., Daniel Elena-Lopez, 24, enters the Burlington store at Victory and Laurel Canyon Boulevards in North Hollywood, a section of L.A.’s San Fernando Valley. Despite the rain and cool temperature, he is dressed in shorts and a tank top as he wheels his bicycle inside the store and brings it up the escalator to the second floor.

He next appears near the top of the escalator dressed in a jacket and pants apparently selected from racks in the store. He lays the bike on its side, partially blocking access to the down escalator. As customers nonchalantly pass by, he picks up the bike and raises it over his head before putting it back down and walking it a short distance, at which point he strikes a woman with his hand before stumbling over the bike. He returns to the top of the escalator, leans the bike against a railing, then retrieves the heavy cable bicycle lock he had previously dropped.
...
He re-enters the store and hurries up the escalator as the first four police officers arrive. Two of them are armed with shotguns, the third has his handgun drawn, and the fourth talks on his radio while his handgun remains holstered. As these officers ascend the escalator, a fifth officer arrives and draws his handgun before heading up the escalator.

Two more officers soon arrive, one of them armed with a rifle. They head up the escalator to join their colleagues. Three additional officers enter shortly thereafter.

A camera on the second floor captures Elena-Lopez as he approaches a woman from behind. She, too, is apparently unaware of what has transpired as she casually pushes a shopping cart between racks of clothing. Elena-Lopez strikes her repeatedly with the lock, then knocks her down and continues striking her with full force. He then drags the woman out of frame as the first officers are seen rounding the corner from the escalator.

The woman crawls back into frame, where Elena-Lopez can be seen striking her with the lock and kicking her in the face. She crawls to the end of the display aisle, where she is now visible to the approaching officers.

The body-camera footage released by the LAPD on Monday shows the officer with the rifle take a position near the bleeding woman and fire three rounds at Elena-Lopez. He died at the scene, as did, tragically, Orellana-Peralta, who was in a nearby changing room with her mother. One of the rifle rounds had apparently ricocheted off the floor and penetrated the wall of the changing room.

In their story describing the incident, the L.A. Times makes an issue of the fact that the officer who fired “had rushed past some of his colleagues who were urging him to slow down.” As the Times writers are apparently unaware (four of them share the byline), LAPD training dictates that an officer with a long gun, preferably a rifle, take the lead position in the diamond formation on the assumption that it is this officer who will see the suspect first and be best equipped to confront him. Recall that at least one caller to the police reported the incident as a shooting.

This is very worth reading. Author "Jack Dunphy" is the nom-de-keyboard of a retired LAPD/LASD (I forget which) officer who is serving in another SoCal PD. He knows the procedures and answers anti-police very effectively on PJMedia (and isn't afraid to call out police sloppiness or misconduct).

[DefiantSix]

Had any one of us pulled that trigger, we'd be presently sitting in jail awaiting charges of Manslaughter, Negligent Discharge of a Firearm, and almost certainly a whole host of charges pulled out of the ADA's butt to make it sound like we were the most depraved human beings ever, at our bond hearing.

The fact that that same standard routinely and consistently doesn't get applied to the jack-booted agents of tyranical government when their actions warrant it is why cops earn every last drop of the hate heaped on their shoulders when one of them pulls a bone headed play like this.

[Eupher]

Had any one of us pulled that trigger, we'd be presently sitting in jail awaiting charges of Manslaughter, Negligent Discharge of a Firearm, and almost certainly a whole host of charges pulled out of the ADA's butt to make it sound like we were the most depraved human beings ever, at our bond hearing.

The fact that that same standard routinely and consistently doesn't get applied to the jack-booted agents of tyranical government when their actions warrant it is why cops earn every last drop of the hate heaped on their shoulders when one of them pulls a bone headed play like this.

I'd posit that none of this would've happened, including the cops discharging their firearms, had the perp not wanted to commit suicide by cop.

That doesn't excuse wanton and felonious behavior by the cops -- we've seen plenty of cops go through the gauntlet of late. Potter and Chauvin are two examples, though I'll agree with you about the jackwagon cop David Bailey who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt - that sumbitch belongs in prison. He can't even take a dump without losing his firearm.

[ExGeeEye]

IMHO Daniel Elena-Lopez killed the girl.  The cop was an unwitting, unwilling weapon.

[DefiantSix]

I'd posit that none of this would've happened, including the cops discharging their firearms, had the perp not wanted to commit suicide by cop.

That doesn't excuse wanton and felonious behavior by the cops -- we've seen plenty of cops go through the gauntlet of late. Potter and Chauvin are two examples, though I'll agree with you about the jackwagon cop David Bailey who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt - that sumbitch belongs in prison. He can't even take a dump without losing his firearm.

I'd argue that, given the setting alone, at no time could this mutt (the cop) have known for any degree of certainty that the background behind his target was clear, and as such he should have holstered his sidearm and dealt with the unarmed perp assaulting bystanders in some other way.

Once again, if it were one of us who had pulled the trigger, that would be the very argument the ADA would be centering his case on, because almost all of us are at least familiar with The Four Rules, and if a cop doesn't have them drummed into him at the Academy long before he even sees a department issued sidearm, I'd sure be interested in hearing the reasoning behind that glaring double standard.

[DefiantSix]

IMHO Daniel Elena-Lopez killed the girl.  The cop was an unwitting, unwilling weapon.

And that's certainly the argument that the Thin Blue Line will be making in order to attempt to circle the wagons around the one who actually made the stupid decision to pull the trigger in the first place. Dog knows there's enough case law for them to fall back on that precedent.

I just love the double standard of "we're all reponsible for our own actions" - until we pin a shiny tin badge on our shirt. [/sarc]

[FlaGator]

On the island of retrospection, all outcomes are known. Not so much in real-time when choices have to be made and information may be incomplete or faulty. One thing I have learned in my 60+ years is never blame on malice what can be explained by stupidity.

[freedumb2003b]

I'd argue that, given the setting alone, at no time could this mutt (the cop) have known for any degree of certainty that the background behind his target was clear, and as such he should have holstered his sidearm and dealt with the unarmed perp assaulting bystanders in some other way.

Once again, if it were one of us who had pulled the trigger, that would be the very argument the ADA would be centering his case on, because almost all of us are at least familiar with The Four Rules, and if a cop doesn't have them drummed into him at the Academy long before he even sees a department issued sidearm, I'd sure be interested in hearing the reasoning behind that glaring double standard.

Here in Texas, a bystander would get a medal if he popped a perp like this.  The cops did nothing wrong.

[Eupher]

I'd argue that, given the setting alone, at no time could this mutt (the cop) have known for any degree of certainty that the background behind his target was clear, and as such he should have holstered his sidearm and dealt with the unarmed perp assaulting bystanders in some other way.

Once again, if it were one of us who had pulled the trigger, that would be the very argument the ADA would be centering his case on, because almost all of us are at least familiar with The Four Rules, and if a cop doesn't have them drummed into him at the Academy long before he even sees a department issued sidearm, I'd sure be interested in hearing the reasoning behind that glaring double standard.

I think it's a stretch that "any one of us" would automatically be prosecuted by any ADA in all locations. It certainly depends on the DA, the DA's involvement with Soros, and the general political bent of the area. Since this incident occurred in the LA area, that would mean that Gascon - the Soros acolyte - has the wherewithal to prosecute the cop.

I get the fact that you abhor cops - you've made that abundantly clear over the years. I don't share your distaste, and the fact we differ on that is perfectly OK.

But let me ask you -- how much more beating with a padlock and a cable should the civilian woman have taken before lethal force was used to take down the perp? Let's keep in mind we don't know the whole story -- we never do in a report like this. We don't know the layout, we don't know all the facts, and we certainly aren't any kind of jury.

From the article:

In this case, the officer responded to a reported shooting, armed himself appropriately, saw the victim being attacked, then shot the attacker a short distance away. There was no one visible behind the suspect that would have caused a concern for a safe background, and the number of rounds fired was not excessive. Under the circumstances, the officer acted reasonably and was well within the law, no matter how tragic the outcome.

[SVPete]

  The heavy duty bike chain and lock Daniel Elena-Lopez wielded wasn't a deadly weapon?

  The woman he "struck repeatedly with the lock" and was "bleeding" really wasn't hurt at all. It was fake Hollywood Blood and she was play-acting when the officer who fired the rifle was shielding her from Daniel Elena-Lopez.

  The cop should have "holstered" his rifle?

  The changing room through whose wall a rifle bullet penetrated after ricocheting off the floor had transparent walls so the officer confronting the armed Daniel Elena-Lopez could "clear the background"?

  "jack-booted agents of tyranical (sic) government", "this mutt (the cop)", Prejudge much?

[DefiantSix]

I get the fact that you abhor cops - you've made that abundantly clear over the years. I don't share your distaste, and the fact we differ on that is perfectly OK.

Actually what I abhor are double standards. I have far too many people in my life who have chosen 'police officer' as their vocation for me to categorically hate cops.  What I hate is the double standard purpetuated by The Thin Blue Line in order to justify actions of one of their own that would draw a completely different reponse from them if the offense was committed by a civilian.

But let me ask you -- how much more beating with a padlock and a cable should the civilian woman have taken before lethal force was used to take down the perp? Let's keep in mind we don't know the whole story -- we never do in a report like this. We don't know the layout, we don't know all the facts, and we certainly aren't any kind of jury.

The incident took place in a clothing store. Almost all of us have been in one, and we know that the walls of a dressing room are intended for a modicum of privacy only: otherwise they may as well be constructed of kleenex, because they aren't load bearing, and they sure as hell aren't bulletproof.

That said, we know that the officers sight lines were significantly obscured by the location: again, I will assert that -almost- any of us in that situation would be counseled by our inner range master to hold fire, because we know dressing room walls are thin, we know that just because we can't see thru that wall, doesn't mean there wouldn't be somebody on the other side of it, and (in this specific situation) we know that we're a cop with better tools on our belts - ::cough:: Tazers ::cough:: for dealing with the perp without risking collateral damage to bystanders.

A simple in your head probability calculation would tell us that since this was not the first victim the perp assaulted with the bike lock, that none of the others were fatally injured in his attacks (speaking more to his capability with the weapon he was using than his intent), and that this woman had already survived his attack with the same bike lock thus far, the probability that he would have fatally injured her in the additional seconds it would take to maneuver into position to use a Tazer on him would be remarkably low.

But this officer wasn't thinking through the problem - like they are constantly quoted expecting us to do - was he?

[Eupher]

Actually what I abhor are double standards.

Point taken. But let's be real here -- you do not waste a single opportunity to bash cops. I've seen it with my own eyes over years.

The incident took place in a clothing store. Almost all of us have been in one, and we know that the walls of a dressing room are intended for a modicum of privacy only: otherwise they may as well be constructed of kleenex, because they aren't load bearing, and they sure as hell aren't bulletproof.

That said, we know that the officers sight lines were significantly obscured by the location: again, I will assert that -almost- any of us in that situation would be counseled by our inner range master to hold fire, because we know dressing room walls are thin, we know that just because we can't see thru that wall, doesn't mean there wouldn't be somebody on the other side of it, and (in this specific situation) we know that we're a cop with better tools on our belts - ::cough:: Tazers ::cough:: for dealing with the perp without risking collateral damage to bystanders.

A simple in your head probability calculation would tell us that since this was not the first victim the perp assaulted with the bike lock, that none of the others were fatally injured in his attacks (speaking more to his capability with the weapon he was using than his intent), and that this woman had already survived his attack with the same bike lock thus far, the probability that he would have fatally injured her in the additional seconds it would take to maneuver into position to use a Tazer on him would be remarkably low.

But this officer wasn't thinking through the problem - like they are constantly quoted expecting us to do - was he?

The jury hasn't even been assembled yet (to my knowledge, the cop hasn't even been charged, even in Gascon's den of iniquity) and you're playing Monday morning quarterback.

Got it.

I think you're way out there on this one, D6. 

[SVPete]

"Jack Dunphy" has posted a follow-up article on PJMedia, https://pjmedia.com/columns/jack-dunphy/2021/12/31/as-the-narrative-on-the-lapd-shooting-forms-be-wary-of-experts-n1545782:

https://pjmedia.com/columns/jack-dunphy/2021/12/31/as-the-narrative-on-the-lapd-shooting-forms-be-wary-of-experts-n1545782

For example, in a New York Times profile on Officer Jones, published on Thursday, the writers say body camera footage released by the LAPD shows that Jones “could be seen racing past his fellow officers with a drawn rifle, even as his colleagues called out to him to ‘slow down’ and ‘hold up.’”

Some background is called for here. Prior to my retirement from the LAPD, I was a member of the cadre that regularly trained in “immediate action, rapid deployment” tactics. This training was instituted in police departments across the country after the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, during which officers assembled outside the school but did not enter while waiting for SWAT teams to respond. The training has been modified over the years, particularly in response to the 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai, India.

Distilled to its most basic elements, the training calls for responding officers to quickly assemble into teams, enter the location, then locate and neutralize the threat. The training is designed so that officers from different entities within a department, or even from different departments, can move to save lives without delay and without instruction from a command post.

Patrol officers and detectives arriving at such an incident are likely to be equipped with different weaponry, with all of them carrying handguns, some with shotguns or rifles. As I explained in the previous column, it is an essential tenet of the training that an officer with a long gun, preferably a rifle, take the lead on the assumption that it is he who will encounter the suspect first and be best prepared to fire accurately.
...
As is their wont, the Los Angeles Times has contributed to the erroneous narrative by citing purported “experts” whose expertise is debatable. In a story published Thursday, they cite George Kirkham, a former police officer and professor emeritus at the Florida State University College of Criminology and Criminal Justice, who said the officer should not have fired a “military-grade rifle” inside the store. ...
...
Anyone relying on this man’s “expertise” should be wary. His use of the term “military-grade rifle” betrays an ignorance of weaponry ill befitting someone claiming to be an expert. Rifles have evolved over time for better accuracy and reliability. Denying the police use of a weapon that happens to resemble those used by the military is akin to saying you want them to carry those that are less accurate and less reliable than the best available, all for the sake of appearances. Also, a rifle round is no more inherently deadly than one of a similar caliber fired from a handgun except in that it travels at a higher speed. And as for Kirckham’s reference to the low hit rate for police shootings, this is precisely why a rifle is preferred in these situations: it can be fired more accurately than a handgun, a round from which also would have penetrated the wall of the dressing room where Valentina was hiding.

Beware "experts" whose shooting expertise is concentrated around their mouth. I'm not a "gun nut" or skilled shooter or whatever, but it requires little knowledge to realize that a hand gun is less precise than a rifle. It also requires "education" amounting to a GoogTube video or two to know that a 9 mm or .40 S&W round will penetrate a thin wall and still have the energy to be deadly. IOW, had the officer fired a handgun instead of a rifle, the chances of missing would have increased, and stray bullets penetrating the dressing room wall would still have been potentially deadly.

[Eupher]

"Jack Dunphy" has posted a follow-up article on PJMedia, https://pjmedia.com/columns/jack-dunphy/2021/12/31/as-the-narrative-on-the-lapd-shooting-forms-be-wary-of-experts-n1545782:

https://pjmedia.com/columns/jack-dunphy/2021/12/31/as-the-narrative-on-the-lapd-shooting-forms-be-wary-of-experts-n1545782

Beware "experts" whose shooting expertise is concentrated around their mouth. I'm not a "gun nut" or skilled shooter or whatever, but it requires little knowledge to realize that a hand gun is less precise than a rifle. It also requires "education" amounting to a GoogTube video or two to know that a 9 mm or .40 S&W round will penetrate a thin wall and still have the energy to be deadly. IOW, had the officer fired a handgun instead of a rifle, the chances of missing would have increased, and stray bullets penetrating the dressing room wall would still have been potentially deadly.

Kinda looks like Dr. George Kirckham is one of those professional "expert witnesses" who makes his money from testifying at court cases.

Kinda like an ambulance chaser -- making money from somebody else's pain. 

https://krimedr.com/

ETA: From the above link, which spares no words in extolling the much-vaunted Dr. George Kirckham as he single-handedly erases the world of perps and their crimes. God, just reading a little bit of this crap from this web site is nauseating as hell.

This jackoff spent SIX WHOLE MONTHS as a PART-TIME cop, and he calls himself an "experienced" LEO. Gag me with a spoon.

No, this turd is just another schmuck selling himself and desperately trying to be relevant.

AFTER ATTENDING AND GRADUATING FROM A POLICE ACADEMY, DR. KIRKHAM SPENT SIX MONTHS AS A PATROLMAN ON A HIGH CRIME BEAT IN A MAJOR AMERICAN CITY. AFTER REJOINING THE FACULTY AT FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY, HE CONTINUED WORKING AS A FULLY-SWORN POLICE OFFICER ON A PART TIME BASIS THROUGHOUT HIS ACADEMIC CAREER, ULTIMATELY SERVING WITH FOUR DIFFERENT LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN ASSIGNMENTS AS DIVERSE AS UNIFORMED PATROL, CRISIS INTERVENTION, VICE & NARCOTICS, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND UNDERCOVER WORK AS PART OF AN ORGANIZED CRIME STRIKE FORCE.