The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Reply

13 yr old boy carrying fake rifle killed

  • chinese58 said... (original post)

    They didn't get a call about a suspicious man. They were just out patrolling, saw the kid, they called the dispatcher to let him/her know they saw him and were about to confront him.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/10/24/andy-lopez-fake-gun-police_n_4155179.html

    "The sheriff's department said the deputies involved had been patrolling in Santa Rosa on Tuesday afternoon when they saw someone who appeared to be holding an assault weapon."

    Why would they have not told her he had a gun? Shouldn't the dispatcher's report that was created at 3:14:15 have said they had seen a man with a gun instead of saying they saw a suspicious man?

    I'm not sure what you're trying to get at? Are you trying to say the cops planted a fake "assault rifle" on the kid?

  • DawgCommander said... (original post)

    What a stupid kid.

    should have been the end of the thread.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • OHSethIO said... (original post)

    I'm not sure what you're trying to get at? Are you trying to say the cops planted a fake "assault rifle" on the kid?

    No, I just don't understand why the dispatcher created a report about a suspicious person when they were checking out a man with a gun.

    The sheriff's report said:

    "3:14:15 - Dispatch creates report of suspicious person walking near Moorland and West Robles avenues."

    In my mind, the report should should have been about a man with a gun and that line from the Sheriff's report should have read:

    "3:14:15 - Dispatch creates report of man with a gun walking near moorland and West Robles avenues."

    Isn't a guy with a gun different from a suspicious person walking down the street?

    signature image signature image signature image
  • chinese58 said... (original post)

    No, I just don't understand why the dispatcher created a report about a suspicious person when they were checking out a man with a gun.

    The sheriff's report said:

    "3:14:15 - Dispatch creates report of suspicious person walking near Moorland and West Robles avenues."

    In my mind, the report should should have been about a man with a gun and that line from the Sheriff's report should have read:

    "3:14:15 - Dispatch creates report of man with a gun walking near moorland and West Robles avenues."

    Isn't a guy with a gun different from a suspicious person walking down the street?

    Not necessarily. He could of just been suspicious (even though if I'm not mistaken, CA has an "assault rifle" ban?) until he proved to be a perceived threat.

  • OHSethIO said... (original post)

    A suspicious person, is basically what I said. They were unsure of the situation but knew a individual had a gun.

    Sounds like the kid turned around (can't say whether or not he pointed the gun or raised, whatever term you want to use) but it's obvious to me that the officer just didn't shoot the kid just to shoot him.

    We don't know how junior or senior the officer was but by the old man saying put that things away, it's obvious he shouldn't of had it out in the first place.

    The bottom line is the 13 year old was returning the pellet gun to his friend that had left it at his house that weekend. They had obviously been playing with it and his friend was waiting for the victim to bring him his pellet gun. He said he waited for hours but the 13 year old never showed then he found out the 13 year old (his friend) had been shot and killed on his way to his house.

    The deputy never gave the 13 year old a chance. He hollered at him from behind his vehicle door while the kid has his back to him. The child started turning around when the deputy opened fire. It was just a huge mistake and the deputy needs to own up to it. He jumped to the wrong conclusion and never even gave the kid a chance at all. The kid probably didn't even know what the deputy said because he had his back to him while he was walking.

  • This I don't understand. 8 shots were fired and the 13 year old was hit 7 times: bullet to the chest, hip, right wrist, right forearm, right buttocks, left bicep and hip. How can this child pose a threat if he is shot in the right buttocks because that tells you that he wasn't completely turned around. If he was completely turned around, the deputy could not have shot him in the buttocks at all. Something is just very wrong here. The FBI announced Friday that they are going to be investigating this deputy "shooting" of the 13 year old. I am glad they are getting involved because they will get to the bottom of it and there won't be a cover up.

  • abrellbama5818 said... (original post)

    This I don't understand. 8 shots were fired and the 13 year old was hit 7 times: bullet to the chest, hip, right wrist, right forearm, right buttocks, left bicep and hip. How can this child pose a threat if he is shot in the right buttocks because that tells you that he wasn't completely turned around. If he was completely turned around, the deputy could not have shot him in the buttocks at all. Something is just very wrong here. The FBI announced Friday that they are going to be investigating this deputy "shooting" of the 13 year old. I am glad they are getting involved because they will get to the bottom of it and there won't be a cover up.

    You eliminate the threat.

  • abrellbama5818 said... (original post)

    The bottom line is the 13 year old was returning the pellet gun to his friend that had left it at his house that weekend. They had obviously been playing with it and his friend was waiting for the victim to bring him his pellet gun. He said he waited for hours but the 13 year old never showed then he found out the 13 year old (his friend) had been shot and killed on his way to his house.

    The deputy never gave the 13 year old a chance. He hollered at him from behind his vehicle door while the kid has his back to him. The child started turning around when the deputy opened fire. It was just a huge mistake and the deputy needs to own up to it. He jumped to the wrong conclusion and never even gave the kid a chance at all. The kid probably didn't even know what the deputy said because he had his back to him while he was walking.

    What does the first part have to do with the reasoning why the officer shot him? Given all the facts, obviously the officer wouldnt of shot the child.

    The officer "never gave the 13 year old a chance" because he was "raising" "pointing" "aiming" or whatever verbage you want to use for pointing the gun at the officer, He reacted on instint and protecting the public and himself from what he thought was another massacre about to happen.

    What if this person (regardless of age) actually did have an AR15, and was heading down the road to shoot as many people as he could... with all the shootings lately, is that really so far out of the question?

    Btw, of course the FBI/DOJ are going to get involved, anything that has to do with PR they are going to get involved in, and ruin even more peoples lives just to get in a good light.

    This post was edited by OHSethIO 9 months ago

  • OHSethIO said... (original post)

    What does the first part have to do with the reasoning why the officer shot him? Given all the facts, obviously the officer wouldnt of shot the child.

    The officer "never gave the 13 year old a chance" because he was "raising" "pointing" "aiming" or whatever verbage you want to use for pointing the gun at the officer, He reacted on instint and protecting the public and himself from what he thought was another massacre about to happen.

    What if this person (regardless of age) actually did have an AR15, and was heading down the road to shoot as many people as he could... with all the shootings lately, is that really so far out of the question?

    Btw, of course the FBI/DOJ are going to get involved, anything that has to do with PR they are going to get involved in, and ruin even more peoples lives just to get in a good light.

    You missed the whole point. How was he shot in the right buttocks if the kid was facing the deputy with a raised pellet gun? Answer that one. If the kid was facing him, there is NO WAY the deputy could have shot him in the right buttocks yet that was one of the 7 places he was shot. And you tell me how at 3:14:15 the dispatch creates file of suspicious person with gun, then at 3:14:25 shots are reported fired and at 3:14:41 emergency crews are requested. There was absolutely no time for the deputy to assess anything AND the bystand said he saw the deputy vehicle and seconds later her shots being fired. The kid had his back to the deputy when the deputy hollered at him and was starting to turn around when the deputy opened fire on the kid so NO, the kid had no chance at all. The DEPUTY SCREWED THE POOCH ON THIS ONE BIG and the FBI is now investigating the deputies and the shooting and they will get to the bottom of it. You CAN'T be a threat to someone when you are shot in the buttocks!

  • One more thing, why did they handcuff him when out of 8 bullets he had been shot 7 times, the chest, hip, right wrist, right forearm, right buttocks, left bicep and hip. Why weren't they trying to save his life instead of handcuffing him? Couldn't they see he was mortally wounded? The witness said he had the pellet gun in his left hand but he apparently was turning with his right side because that is where most of the bullets hit were on his right side of his body.

    And yes, the FBI has already stepped in and is investigating this so it won't be swept under the rug because the deputy made a huge blunder!

  • TheBigSpur

    Jeff4SC

    abrellbama5818 said... (original post)

    You missed the whole point. How was he shot in the right buttocks if the kid was facing the deputy with a raised pellet gun? Answer that one. If the kid was facing him, there is NO WAY the deputy could have shot him in the right buttocks yet that was one of the 7 places he was shot. And you tell me how at 3:14:15 the dispatch creates file of suspicious person with gun, then at 3:14:25 shots are reported fired and at 3:14:41 emergency crews are requested. There was absolutely no time for the deputy to assess anything AND the bystand said he saw the deputy vehicle and seconds later her shots being fired. The kid had his back to the deputy when the deputy hollered at him and was starting to turn around when the deputy opened fire on the kid so NO, the kid had no chance at all. The DEPUTY SCREWED THE POOCH ON THIS ONE BIG and the FBI is now investigating the deputies and the shooting and they will get to the bottom of it. You CAN'T be a threat to someone when you are shot in the buttocks!

    Good point.

    I've been wondering the entire time if the gun was in the kids hand or bag etc.

    I think now we all know that the kid wasn't even facing that cop or should I say pig.

    Hopefully this is investigated thoroughly and they get to the bottom of it.

    This post was edited by Jeff4SC 9 months ago

  • abrellbama5818 said... (original post)

    The bottom line is the 13 year old was returning the pellet gun to his friend that had left it at his house that weekend. They had obviously been playing with it and his friend was waiting for the victim to bring him his pellet gun. He said he waited for hours but the 13 year old never showed then he found out the 13 year old (his friend) had been shot and killed on his way to his house.

    The deputy never gave the 13 year old a chance. He hollered at him from behind his vehicle door while the kid has his back to him. The child started turning around when the deputy opened fire. It was just a huge mistake and the deputy needs to own up to it. He jumped to the wrong conclusion and never even gave the kid a chance at all. The kid probably didn't even know what the deputy said because he had his back to him while he was walking.

    Fail on logic.

    What did the deputy know at the time? Kids age and the fact that it was a replica are irrelevant. The cop knew that it looked like a young person carrying a real rifle. The only question is whether or not the cops did say drop your weapon or something to that effect and did the kid start to raise the barrel of the weapon? If so, the cop did nothing wrong.

    signature image
  • menichols74 said... (original post)

    Fail on logic.

    What did the deputy know at the time? Kids age and the fact that it was a replica are irrelevant. The cop knew that it looked like a young person carrying a real rifle. The only question is whether or not the cops did say drop your weapon or something to that effect and did the kid start to raise the barrel of the weapon? If so, the cop did nothing wrong.

    10 seconds past between the time the officers reported seeing the kid and him being dead.

    They told him to drop the weapon. He turned around and he was shot.

    There are young kids running around with BB guns in this area all the time. That context is pretty critical here.

    What I didn't realize before though... This was a Sheriff. They are responsible for the entire county. They see more crime, and were prob not as familiar with the community as the local PD.