[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Daniel Shaver's shooting by police officer was an avoidable execution
Source: CNN
URL Source: http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/opini ... ng-opinion-gagliano/index.html
Published: Dec 12, 2017
Author: James A. Gagliano
Post Date: 2017-12-13 09:42:44 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1465
Comments: 34

James A. Gagliano is a CNN law enforcement analyst and a retired FBI supervisory special agent. He also serves as an adjunct assistant professor at St. John's University in Queens, New York. Follow him on Twitter @JamesAGagliano. The views expressed in this commentary are his own.

(CNN)While in Mesa, Arizona on a business trip for his Texas-based pest control company in 2016, Daniel Shaver was slaughtered in a hotel hallway. And though the Arizona jury that acquitted the officer, 27-year-old Philip "Mitch" Brailsford, of second-degree murder and reckless manslaughter charges may have gotten it right according to a legal standard, a confluence of interrelated errors by the tactical team transpired to cause this tragedy, and it was entirely preventable.

James Gagliano
Then, I forced myself to rewatch the stomach-turning video many times over from the perspective of someone who has participated in hundreds upon hundreds of tactical resolution incidents.
    Yes, two months following the shooting, Brailsford was fired from the Mesa Police Department for violating department policy -- including having the words "You're F*****" engraved on the barrel of his personal, department-approved AR-15. And, presumably, the jury determined that movements by a confused and intoxicated Shaver could have been interpreted as making furtive gestures in effort to retrieve a concealed weapon -- of which none was ever recovered from the victim's body.
    Those "furtive movements" might very well have given Brailsford, in the jury's eyes, a legal right to shoot Shaver. But the officer's unprofessional conduct, seeming inexperience, and the confusing commands we hear being issued by a SWAT officer, directly and indirectly influenced Shaver's reactions, which resulted in the shooting. Here's how:

    The SWAT team member issuing the initial commands instigated non-compliant situation.

    In a quarter-century of participating in and leading tactical resolution operations, I have never heard a law enforcement professional use such offensive -- almost taunting -- rhetoric. The vocal police officer tasked with directing the operation appeared hell-bent on baiting a confused but receptive and compliant subject into making a deadly mistake.
    Was this related to a dysfunctional team or to this officer's inexperience or lack of emotional maturity and control? What police executive with oversight of tactical operations could have felt this officer possessed the leadership and interpersonal skills necessary to de-escalate potentially combustible situations?
    In high-stress in extremis situations with a noncompliant subject who purposely disregards commands, it is understandable that law enforcement officers may issue loud, get-your-attention directions -- sometimes laced with profanity that can be commensurate with the gravity of a potentially dangerous encounter. But these cases typically involve a physical confrontation or potentially deadly standoff.
    Absent the dispatch call of "weapon(s) in a hotel room," there is no evidence on the video that justifies the officer's need to vocally ratchet up the temperature. Listening to him issue commands was revolting -- he comes off as a drunk-with-power bully who enjoys toying with his prey.
    Examples of inappropriate and unconscionable language:
    (0:26) "Apparently we have a failure for you to comprehend simple instructions."
    (0:49) "Shut up! I'm not here to be tactful or diplomatic with you. You listen. You obey."
    (2:08) (to a woman who had exited the room ahead of Shaver) "Young lady, shut up and listen."
    (4:10) (screaming) "You think you're going to fall, you better fall on your face."
    The officer issuing commands also referred to Shaver, 26, as "young man." A simple "sir" or "ma'am" is standard professional vernacular in dealing with potential arrestees. It can be issued sternly, but respectfully. In my estimation, his use of the word "young" when addressing Shaver and his hotel guest was as a condescending pejorative.

    Failure of SWAT's senior onscene leadership to acknowledge mitigating factors.

    When issuing commands, an officer needs to immediately assess external factors. Can the subject hear me? Is there a language barrier? Are my commands concise and clear enough? The confusing and contradictory commands exacerbated the situation. In incidents like this, officers must have rehearsed in training -- countless times -- the commands to be used in high-risk arrests. Brevity and succinctness are critical.
    An inquiry was made as to whether or not Shaver had been drinking. If someone is inebriated, their default response may be a denial. Communication -- reading the signs -- involves intuitive analysis that takes in a person's body language, tone of voice, and selected verbiage. Police posted at DUI checkpoints are trained for the telltale physical signs of alcohol consumption.
    This officer also should have noted how visibly shaken and fearful the subject was. It is true that duplicitous subjects may attempt to employ a ruse to get the officer to relax or drop his guard. But in this instance, you had a tactical team, strength in numbers, and a position of command resulting from the element of surprise.

    My belief is that as confused (and inebriated) as Shaver was, the steady volley of confusing shouted commands frustrated him and he assumed a pose he felt was consistent with an arrest, i.e., placing his hands behind his back. His confused state and reflexive reaction to place hands behind his back could then be "interpreted" as "going for a weapon."
    Two more gestures to his backside appear to be his attempts to pull his pants up while complying with a flurry of confusing commands. While we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, my assessment is that this officer was not equipped with the necessary behavioral assessment experience.

    The SWAT team disregarded arrest protocols.

    What appears obvious from the video is the senior onscene officer's inability to discern that subject was struggling to find his balance while complying with the confusing commands. To those speculating as to why he would have been asked to cross his ankles, this is standard arrest protocol in a high-risk scenario. If a subject is lying prone or kneeling with their ankles crossed, the un-crossing of ankles requires an additional movement prior to any effort to escape or physically confront arresting officers. This provides officers more reaction time.
    But asking a subject to crawl forward with crossed ankles is not a standard safe arrest practice or protocol. The most forward operator does not typically deliver commands, as his specific role is to focus on the door down the hallway from which the subjects had just exited. Shaver could have been asked to lie prone and await cuffing from advancing officers, while this "hallway monitor" remains trained on the door ahead. Then, the advance man (Brailsford) could hurriedly move forward past a prone Shaver (with interlaced fingers behind his head) and then a "cuffing team" could immediately move forward in trace, and effect the handcuffing of the subject.
    Alternatively, Shaver could have been put on his knees, with fingers interlaced and hands placed atop his head. Brailsford could have had him rotate in a circle and then remain facing away from responding officers, so police could view his beltline and any potential secreted weapons. Shaver could have then been instructed to lift his shirt while facing away. This gives police valuable time to assess the threat and respond with deadly force appropriately if Shaver were to pull a weapon, spin around and attempt to locate a target.
    At trial, Deputy County Attorney Susie Charbel told the jury that Shaver was intoxicated and still referred to Brailsford's actions as that of a "killer."
    And while Brailsford, as the shooter, stood trial alone, the team's leadership surely deserves a fair amount of the criticism. The toxicology report would definitively chronicle what Shaver's blood alcohol content level was. His apparent alcohol impairment combined with the rational fear any reasonable person would be consumed with in a similar situation. These circumstances then abruptly collided bluntly with the unforced errors committed by the tactical team --- and the result was a shooting that shouldn't have occurred.

    Officers should have gathered more intelligence.

    Allow for potential cooperation from the two subjects in your custody to provide you better context and intelligence. Ask questions about weaponry in the room and, if subject admits as much, query the purpose for having them. Maybe Shaver could have explained his professional need for pellet guns and advised where they were located. At a minimum, it would have applied context. You never trust without verification, but Shaver's explanation could have been combined with information investigators might have gathered from employees at the front desk while SWAT was handling the threat upstairs.
    Follow CNN Opinion

    Join us on Twitter and Facebook

    Many of the police shootings that have drawn attention to the inappropriate and all too often deadly actions of officers illustrate the role of race and implicit bias in their devastating outcomes. The case of Philip Brailsford illustrates something different -- a young, inexperienced police officer who was part of a team comprised of specialists (one who exhibited unprofessionalism and lack of expertise in issuing commands) ill-suited to read a less-than-complex set of circumstances, leading to a series of preventable errors that resulted in the infuriatingly "legal" execution of a man.
    In the numerous officer-involved shootings I've reviewed, I can often provide a sensible explanation for a tactical team's actions or find benefit of the doubt to apply.
    There are neither here.
    A previous version of this article incorrectly identified Philip Brailsford as the officer giving commands in the video. Another officer testified during the trial that he, not Brailsford, was issuing those commands so this article has been updated to reflect that the other officer was the one giving commands.
    (10 images)

    Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


    TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

    Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 33.

    #6. To: Deckard (#0)

    Seems to me that the author of this article knows what he is talking about here and has the experience to back up his opinion.
    It can seem to you whatever you want it to seem to you.

    And your testimony that the author “seems” to know what he is talking about is merely YOUR opinion.

    Furthermore, the author of this article is simply stating HIS opinion.

    So with all the opinions and opinions about opinions set aside….and for those who have so far been unable to….let them now learn to deal with one specific fact.

    The specific fact is that an eight-member jury of the cops peers listened to six weeks of testimony and saw a video before that jury rendered a lawful and the un- appealed verdict of NOT GUILTY.

    Now there is a fact….while remembering that opinions are like assholes, every idiot has one.

    Gatlin  posted on  2017-12-13   10:54:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


    #8. To: Gatlin (#6)

    Furthermore, the author of this article is simply stating HIS opinion.

    As a former FBI Special Agent, former head of the FBI’s Crisis Management and 24/7 Operations Center Programs, former Senior Team Leader of the 45-man FBI New York Office SWAT Team and former member of the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team.

    I'd say his opinion counts for a lot.

    He has pretty much validated the opinions of others here on this site who can see that this was an unneccessay execution - murder if you like.

    Deckard  posted on  2017-12-13   10:59:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


    #15. To: Deckard (#8)

    He has pretty much validated the opinions of others ..
    Hmmm …

    Let’s see now: You say that his “opinion” pretty much validates the “opinion” of others …

    Tell me exactly how does that work….that ”an opinion validates other “opinions?”

    You are forever lost in the whirlpool of unreality….just spinning your life away, aimlessly.

    Gatlin  posted on  2017-12-13   11:23:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


    #24. To: Gatlin (#15)

    Tell me exactly how does that work….that ”an opinion validates other “opinions?”

    Hey, hey. That worked in Hitler's Germany.

    misterwhite  posted on  2017-12-13   12:09:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


    #29. To: misterwhite (#24)

    Tell me exactly how does that work….that ”an opinion validates other “opinions?”

    Hey, hey. That worked in Hitler's Germany.

    Yea, it did.

    I am however “riveted” with amazement that Deckard didn’t see the gross stupidity in his statement.

    But then, nothing should surprise me when it comes from that poor boy.

    Gatlin  posted on  2017-12-13   13:21:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


    #32. To: Gatlin (#29)

    I am however “riveted” with amazement that Deckard didn’t see the gross stupidity in his statement.

    He believes in a personal moral code (rather than a social moral code). Therefore, the more people who think the way he does the better. He hopes to prevail by sheer numbers.

    misterwhite  posted on  2017-12-13   16:14:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


    #33. To: misterwhite (#32)

    I am however “riveted” with amazement that Deckard didn’t see the gross stupidity in his statement.

    He believes in a personal moral code (rather than a social moral code). Therefore, the more people who think the way he does the better. He hopes to prevail by sheer numbers.

    I can see that and understand the reasoning. And to get to those numbers he seeks, his tactic is to try and dominate with sheer volume the articles he posts supporting his two agenda positions and then try to dominate the thread by attempting to browbeat the respondents in that he continually demands that everyone accept something he proclaims. That is why instead of just one “bad cop” or one “bad government” article….he will generally post two, three and sometime more al most in sequence.

    After posting the articles, he then strives to overpower again with sheer volume the number of posts using other peoples ideas and thoughts he stored away in a vast repository categorized by subject so that he can almost instantly reach in and grab a pre-programmed active link, add a few word and then post it.

    I find he is stymied when personalize responses shift from a reactive posture to proactive to go head on with him. He simply cannot handle that and then resorts to more barrage spamming.

    I do find him to be both complex and strikingly interesting in a bizarre manner and I hope I haven’t driven him off completely….because it is amusing to toy with him between my other activities working on the Web.

    Gatlin  posted on  2017-12-13   16:57:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


    Replies to Comment # 33.

            There are no replies to Comment # 33.


    End Trace Mode for Comment # 33.

    TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

    [Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

    Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com