Police in Hoover, Alabama, are still trying to get their story straight days after an officer shot and killed the wrong man at a mall last week.
It's still unclear what exactly happened on Thanksgiving night that led police working security to shoot and kill Emantic "EJ" Bradford Jr. There was a prior shooting that injured two people, though police now say Bradford was probably not responsible. Still, Bradford was shot and killed by an officer who saw him holding a gun. While all the facts have yet to come out, the Hoover Police Department's seemingly ever-changing explanations haven't helped clear things up.
In a joint statement sent to media outlets yesterday morning, the police department and the city of Hoover claimed "with certainty" that "Bradford brandished a gun during the seconds following the gunshots, which instantly heightened the sense of threat to approaching police officers responding to the chaotic scene." As the Associated Press noted, the statement seems to suggest Bradford shouldn't have pulled out his gun at all, even though his father claims Bradford had a permit for the handgun. Alabama is also an open carry state.
Later yesterday, police posted an update to Facebook "to clarify" their use of "brandish." That word "was used because Mr. Bradford had a gun in his hand as police officers responded to the active shooter situation between mall patrons," police said.
Of course, there's a big difference between brandishing a gun and simply holding it in one's hand. According to the Cambridge Dictionary, "brandish" means: "to wave something in the air in a threatening or excited way." Dictionary.com's definition—"to shake or wave, as a weapon; flourish"—is a little less specific. Still the threatening connotation is the same.
In Bradford's case, authorities have yet to reveal evidence suggesting he posed a threat to police or innocent bystanders. In fact, Ben Crump, an attorney for Bradford's family, said at a press conference Sunday that witnesses have claimed Bradford was attempting to help people in the midst of the chaos following the original shooting, only to be shot "within milliseconds" and without a verbal warning from the officer who opened fire. Bradford "was trying to be somebody who helped save people, yet he was killed," Crump said.
There's been significant confusion regarding this case from the beginning. It all started late Thursday night at the Riverchase Galleria in Hoover, where thousands of people were kicking off the holiday shopping season. The scene turned chaotic when a gunman opened fire, injuring an 18-year-old man and a 12-year-old girl. At some point, Bradford took his gun out. He may not have been the only one, as AL.com reported Thursday that "several shoppers were seen with their guns drawn."
Bradford was quickly shot by police. According to The Washington Post:
"While moving toward the shooting scene, one of the officers encountered a suspect brandishing a pistol and shot him," police said in a statement written immediately after the shooting. In a revised statement, they said Bradford was fatally shot while "fleeing the shooting scene while brandishing a handgun."
At first, police said they had apprehended the right suspect. But on Saturday they admitted "that while Mr. Bradford may have been involved in some aspect of the altercation, he likely did not fire the rounds that injured the 18-year-old victim." The 12-year-old who was shot is believed to have been an "innocent bystander," police said.
The investigation into the shooting, as well as the search for the real gunman, is now in the hands of the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA). Hopefully, we'll soon get a clear picture of what happened that night.
That said, the death of Bradford, who was black, brings to mind a similar police shooting that took place just weeks ago. As Reason's Robby Soave reported earlier this month, an armed security guard at a bar in Chicago returned fire on an active shooter and eventually pinned him to the ground. But the guard who, like Bradford, was black, was shot and killed when police arrived on the scene and thought he was the bad guy.
In both cases, it's important not to make final conclusions until all the facts come out. But this much is clear: Neither man deserved to die. If witnesses are to be believed, both appear to have been the proverbial "good guy with a gun." The fact that police shot first and asked questions later just makes their deaths all the more tragic.
#1: misterwhite To: Deckard (#0)
Why didn't the use a legal dictionary? Legally, it's if the other person feels threatened.
If your handgun is in your pants pocket and another person sees it "printing" (ie., can clearly see the outline of the gun) and feels threatened, that's brandishing -- even though you never even touched it or waved it around. However, if you show your concealed handgun to a friend at his request and "wave it around", that's not brandishing. Your friend doesn't feel threatened.
In the above case, given the totality of the circumstances, the cop believed the man with a gun posed a threat to him and those around him. The person with the gun isn't required to demonstrate a threat. If the people around him FEEL threatened, it's brandishing.
misterwhite posted on 2018-11-28 09:00:19 Reply Private Reply
#2: Deckard To: misterwhite (#1)
Ah yes - the "I feared for my life" defense. Doesn't matter if there is an actual threat - it's all about the poor officer's "feelings".
Apparently no one else at the scene "felt" threatened.
In fact many witnesses say Bradford saved lives before being murdered by a badged thug.
"... witnesses have claimed Bradford was attempting to help people in the midst of the chaos following the original shooting, only to be shot "within milliseconds" and without a verbal warning from the officer who opened fire.
Bradford "was trying to be somebody who helped save people, yet he was killed,"
Deckard posted on 2018-11-28 09:13:18 Reply Private Reply
#3: A K A Stone To: Deckard (#2)
Mistakes can happen.
You have to make a split second decision.
Yes it is tragic.
Do you have any solutions. I don't.
A K A Stone posted on 2018-11-28 09:23:06 Reply Private Reply
#4: misterwhite To: Deckard (#0)
It's not whether he posed a threat to police or innocent bystanders. It's whether police or innocent bystanders felt threatened. That's the legal standard.
misterwhite posted on 2018-11-28 09:39:49 Reply Private Reply
#5: misterwhite To: A K A Stone (#3)
The solution is to holster the weapon.
misterwhite posted on 2018-11-28 09:43:20 Reply Private Reply
#6: A K A Stone To: misterwhite (#5)
A K A Stone posted on 2018-11-28 10:09:58 Reply Private Reply
#7: Hondo68 To: A K A Stone, Deckard (#3)
End qualified immunity. If cops commit a crime they should face execution like everyone else. They're not gods and should have no special priveleges.
Hondo68 posted on 2018-11-28 11:48:22 Reply Private Reply
#8: Hondo68 To: misterwhite (#4)
Hondo68 posted on 2018-11-28 11:51:44 Reply Private Reply
#9: A K A Stone To: hondo68 (#7)
A K A Stone posted on 2018-11-28 13:53:41 Reply Private Reply
#10: Hondo68 To: A K A Stone, tard (#9)
Hondo68 posted on 2018-11-28 14:07:43 Reply Private Reply
#11: misterwhite To: A K A Stone (#6)
Yes. Until the threat goes away. Then I holster my weapon. Especially if I'm in public -- if a cop doesn't shoot me, some other armed citizen might.
misterwhite posted on 2018-11-28 15:25:14 Reply Private Reply
#12: nolu chan To: Deckard (#0)
That was a short waiting period to reach a conclusion.
Where there is an applicable law, brandishing means whatever the law defines it as.
Some states, such as Alabama, do not define the term brandishing, and appear to have no criminal statute using that term. In general, the behavior is defined somewhere, usually as a form of assault. Alabama has a statute on menacing. Federal law provides a definition of brandishing.
The Chicago case is brought up here for the third time. The individual was a security guard. He was at a bar at 4 in the morning, well after the legal sale of alcoholic beverages ended. The bar did not have a valid liquor license. The individual was in possession of a firearm and had no CCL.
In Illinois, the applicable statute appears to fall under assault.
Assault is any intentional conduct that reasonably causes a person to feel afraid of impending violence. Battery is insulting or provoking actual physical contact, such as hitting someone with an object.
Cherry picked dictionary definitions are preempted by any applicable statutory definition.
https://codes.findlaw.com/al/title-13a-criminal-code/al-code-sect-13a-6-23.html
- - - - - - - - - -
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/documents/072000050K12-1.htm
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/concealed-carry-holder-charged-with-felony-after-brandishing-gun-on-i-90-isp-483251441.html
- - - - - - - - - -
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/924
nolu chan posted on 2018-11-28 23:20:46 Reply Private Reply
#13: Pinguinite To: A K A Stone (#3)
I doubt that police are even trained to deal with scenarios where a citizen non-cop has a gun and is one of the good guys. They are instead trained to, essentially, shoot first anytime there is a potential threat to his life or the life of others.
As Alabama is an open carry and concealed carry state, the cops in that state need to be able to NOT shoot anyone they see with a gun. That's the only solution.
Pinguinite posted on 2018-11-29 03:37:43 Reply Private Reply