Washingtonpost.com:

Why was a 73-year-old insurance company executive playing cop?

That’s the simple question many are asking more than a week after an undercover Tulsa sheriff’s operation went wrong — and a white reserve deputy sheriff shot and killed an unarmed black man, apparently by accident.

The reserve deputy, Robert Bates, was charged Monday with second-degree manslaughter, the Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office said.

“Mr. Bates is charged with Second-Degree Manslaughter involving culpable negligence,” Tulsa County District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler said in a statement. “Oklahoma law defines culpable negligence as ‘the omission to do something which a reasonably careful person would do, or the lack of the usual ordinary care and caution in the performance of an act usually and ordinarily exercised by a person under similar circumstances and conditions.’

“The defendant is presumed to be innocent under the law but we will be prepared to present evidence at future court hearings.”

If convicted, Bates could face a maximum of four years in prison and a fine that wouldn’t exceed $1,000, according to the District Attorney’s office.

Ouch!  It sounds like the shooting was clearly an accident on the part of the reserve cop.  I would be more inclined to charge the person who put someone with this little training on such a case.  Now there is the poor decision-making.

The accident was unfortunate.  However, I have not heard nor seen any evidence that would have us believe that the accident involving Mr. Bates and the suspect, Eric Harris,   was anything other than an accident.  At some point, those who are doing something wrong are going to have to shoulder some of the responsibility when things break bad.

Bates should not have been charged.  Eric Harris should not have been shot.  I am not even sure why he was being Tasered.  Tulsa also needs to take a close look at their policies regarding volunteers.  Volunteers should stick to doing paperwork and other details that do not hold the potential for lethal force going awry.

 

 

22 Thoughts to “Reserve “cop” charged after accidental shooting”

  1. Starry flights

    Why an officer’s expletive is more shocking to people than watching Eric Harris die

    For many viewers, seeing Eric Harris being fatally shot on camera by Oklahoma authorities was less shocking than hearing what came afterward.

    “F**k your breath,” an officer yells after a panicked Harris screams that he’s been shot and is losing his breath.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/13/why-an-officers-expletive-is-more-shocking-to-people-than-watching-eric-harris-die/?tid=sm_fb

    The officer who shouted f bombs at a dying man should be charged. Imagine if your last words year d was f u.

    There are so many things wrong with its this scenario I don’t know where to start.

    1. There is so much wrong with all of it. The reserve “cop” immediately said he shot him and he was sorry. The others kept piling on, including a knee to the dying man’s head. I think maybe I think Mr. Bates is the last person who should be charged and that the idiots who were involved in this sting should be the ones going to jail. What moron allowed a non-LEO to work a delicate sting where lethal force might even be used?

      I think Bates made a mistake. The others are cronically stupid and corrupt

  2. Rick Bentley

    I believe it’s obvious Bates should be charged with something.

    When you carry a gun, you have a basic responsibility not to shoot people with it.

    1. I am having a hard time figuring out why Bates should be charged. What moron let him out there? He wasn’t just out playing cowboy.

      Would a uniformed officer been charged with that mistake? If yes, how will we ever recruit the best for our police forces?

      People are human and do make mistakes. The fact that he was there in the first place wasn’t an accident. That was someone’s stupidity and corruption.

  3. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler

    I’m probably going to regret wading into this, but here goes:

    There are gaps in the information available, and I am seeing several assumptions being made, which may or may not be correct. First, there is the assumption that because the officer is classified as a “reserve deputy” that he’s somehow untrained, or one notch-above a mall-cop. Many jurisdictions, including some here in the commonwealth, have reserve officer programs where the officers are “Sworn”, having full arrest powers, and have completed the same training as full-time officers. Many of these are retired LEO’s from other jurisdictions, and volunteer as Reserve or Auxiliary officers wherever they retire. This provides added benefit to the community, at little or no taxpayer expense. PWC Auxiliaries don’t perform the same duties as full-time/paid officers. They serve to free a sworn officer to patrol. Fairfax, however, makes full use of their reserve officers, having sent them through an abbreviated, but arguably sufficient training program to perform these duties. Assuming that Bates was some yahoo weekend-warrior wanting to play lawman is making some great leaps, and may be incorrect.

    With regard to the language being used…Really? These are street cops, who interact daily with thugs and criminals, including the criminal in this case. Do you think the department stresses Emily Post as part of the Rules of Engagement? If the perp died hearing profanity, my guess is he wasn’t hearing anything he hadn’t said daily for much of is adult life.

    Regarding the level of force used to restrain the suspect, wounded or not, you have to understand that the first duty of the cops is to gain complete control over the suspect, ignoring their protestations. Adrenalin is flowing, and fine motor-skills are gone, in a physical situation. Procedure is to control, restrain, secure, THEN assess for wounds. Furthermore, when someone is shot, even at close range, a single wound is rarely fatal. There’s only a few places on the body where one round from a pistol will produce a mortal wound.

    Here’s my take: This was a poorly-planned sting. It doesn’t look like the contingency plan was fully thought out, if the perp ran. Also, it appears to be a training/SOP failure. Where was the taser located on Bates duty-belt? If it was on the same side as his service pistol, then that is a HUGE mistake. Training is a series of repeated actions that build muscle-memory, so the response is nearly automatic during times of stress. Do a bit of research as to what happens to the body, when the fight/flight response activtes. With fine motor-skills gone, adrenalin induced tunnel-vision, temporary hearing loss, etc. etc. the mind may say “Taser”, hand goes for the “Taser” automatically. If the taser is on the same side of the body as “gun”, and has a similar feel (which they do) the mind says “taser” the hand reaches and pulls what feels like a “taser”, but is really the gun. If the training and load-out protocols were good, mind would say “taser” and hand would be reaching for the opposite side of the belt, where the taser is, and the gun isn’t. At least this is the way I have always been trained.

    I do think the initial charge of “Second-Degree Manslaughter involving culpable negligence” appropriate. Bates negligently discharged his pistol. He drew it, and pulled the trigger, while trying to apprehend a suspect who didn’t appear to pose an “imminent threat of inflicting death or serious bodily harm” to others. The fact Bates only meant to taser him, only speaks to intent, not to outcome.

    Now, as tragic as this situation is, let’s not forget for a moment that Eric Harris was engaging in multiple crimes, when he was shot. He was trying to illegally sell a firearm, to an undercover officer. A reasonable person could assume that if Harris had one gun (to sell), he likely had another on his person (maybe to use). This is why the police reacted quickly, with overwhelming numbers, and violence of action. Harris (who may have been armed) was fleeing the police. This must have factored into their minds as they engaged in the short pursuit. Would he turn and fire?

    Also, there have been mentions of race, both Bates’ and Harris’. Why is this germane to the discussion? Were all the cops white? Did they shout racial epithets? Was Harris not there to illegally sell a firearm, but rather to engage in a discussion about improving race-relations, and maybe a game of patty-cake afterward? No. This isn’t “Just like Ferguson, NYC, North Charleston, etc.” Each of these is separate cases and assuming that race was a motivator, or even a contributing factor, is absurd on its face. What, Harris was “profiled” as (on video) he voluntarily got into the undercover car, and attempted to commit a crime?

    Bates as been charge appropriately, IMHO. The police haven’t tried to cover anything up. The prosecutor is being transparent. Let the investigation continue, and let the evidence be presented, including extenuating and mitigating facts, and let a judge or jury decide the outcome. Convict if warranted. Punish as fitting.

    1. I heard on TV that he had been a LEO 64-65 and not since. All indications are that he wasn’t properly trained. That is someone else’s fault, not his.

      No one here has mentioned race, to my knowledge.

      I don’t think people should die on the street. However, if you run from cops, that might just happen.

      I still don’t think Bates should be charged.

  4. Steve Thomas

    Rick Bentley :I believe it’s obvious Bates should be charged with something.

    I agree. Evidence would indicate charges are warranted.
    When you carry a gun, you have a basic responsibility not to shoot people with it.

    Half-agree: When you are lawfully armed, you have a paramount responsibility to only use lethal force to stop an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury to your person, or third-parties, and to cease applying deadly force when that threat has been ended.

  5. Starryflights

    Mr Harris was pleading for his life when the officer told him to F himself. He had been shot and was pleading for aid. He didn’t deserve an F bomb@Steve Thomas

  6. Ed Myers

    Police should only be armed with Tasers. Lethal force is never necessary as a valid police response.

  7. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler
    Moon,

    While I whole-heartedly agree that if you are engaged in criminal activity, especially felonious criminal activity and as an unintended consequence of your actions, you end up dead, well it was your poor judgment that ultimately led to your taking a dirt-nap.

    But, to Rick’s point, this is about responsibility. Whether you are a LEO or a lawfully armed private citizen, you are ultimately responsible for every bullet that leaves the business-end of the piece, either as a deliberate action, or, as it appears in this case, as a result of a negligent discharge. This was clearly a case of negligent discharge.

    If I’m preparing to clean my firearm, and didn’t properly clear the weapon prior to, and it discharges, that is negligent on my part. If all it does is screw-up the drywall, it’s still a round I am responsible for. If it ends up striking someone else, I am still responsible for that bullet, and its consequences, even though my intent was to clean my weapon.

    At the VERY least, Bates negligently discharged his weapon. We hear his admission of this on the video. Did he intend to shoot the suspect, or simply taze him? Apparently, the DA thought it was the latter, and charged it as such. This will be for a court to decide. But…the fact that he negligently discharged the weapon is beyond dispute, and is a chargeable offense.

    Here’s a link to a great video of another LEO negligent discharge, that is often shown in the training classes I attend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv89_3rrW8Y

  8. Steve Thomas

    Starryflights :Mr Harris was pleading for his life when the officer told him to F himself. He had been shot and was pleading for aid. He didn’t deserve an F bomb@Steve Thomas

    Ok..so what do you charge the cops with? Excessive use of harsh language?

    Using harsh language is a legitimate tactic when dealing with criminals, and police are trained to do so. It is way of gaining control of a situation. Attend a self-defense class, and you will be taught to use “assertive” language, like “Stay down MutherF***er or I’ll shoot you again!

    Between you and Ed, I can’t decide who is presenting the more ridiculous argument.

  9. Wolve

    Unintentional? Looks like it. The fault of Mr. Bates? I would guess. No 73-year-old reserve officer —– training or not; past cop experience or not —— should agree to be on the front line of a planned arrest. You just get in the way. Bad things can happen — this time to the detainee, next time to a fellow officer. Stick to helping with traffic control and providing security at football games or logging reports or anything else which will allow the sworn officers to get out on the street.

    1. I think I have the closest match with Wolve on this issue. Should he and I be worried?

  10. Lyssa

    Virginia has a mandatory retirement for LEO’s at 70 and 1/2.

  11. Scout

    Moon: Steve and Wolve (and a few others) are quite right about this. If anyone negligently kills (or injures) another, there are consequences. It doesn’t excuse the guy that he is up in years or that he perhaps shouldn’t either have been put or put himself in this situation. He carelessly killed someone and the natural charge in such a situation is manslaughter. That’s the way we deal with carelessness in a civilized society. Carelessness that inflicts great harm is not excusable.

    The story raises other issues, however, about these auxiliary personnel in law enforcement offices. Mr. Bates was apparently a successful businessman and benefactor of the local police organization. By virtue of his largesse to the department, he gained status as a volunteer auxiliary. I suppose that the standards of training for such types varies widely all over the country, but the incident indicates that these volunteers should be placed under as strict a training regime as the regular duty officers. And, as Wolve indicates, a guy this age really shouldn’t be assigned or permitted to participate in these types of duties.

  12. Ed Myers

    If there wasn’t a camera recording this he would have never been charged. Everyone would have covered for him.

  13. Steve Thomas

    Ed Myers :
    If there wasn’t a camera recording this he would have never been charged. Everyone would have covered for him.

    This is a moronic statement. First, you can’t prove this. 2nd, it was department policy for the officers to wear cameras, which indicates a policy of transparency, bolstered by the fact that the video was released to the public. Now, if you were to argue this in regards to the N. Charleston shooting, you could make a good argument, but on this one, you are bringing a taser to a gunfight.

  14. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler
    Moon,

    The WaPo excerpt in your top-post specified a white cop shot an “unarmed black man”. It was this to which I was referring. Unarmed? The man had just produced an illegally possessed handgun, and had tried to sell to an undercover officer. No mention of this fact in the WaPo article, which is germane to the discussion, whereas race is coincidental. Harris wasn’t pursued because of his race. He conspired and attempted to commit a felony at the state and federal level, and due to his previous record was not eligible to even possess a gun, let alone sell one.

    1. Oh. I always forget to look at the article intros. I suppose I meant WE (the moonhowlings contributors) weren’t obsessing.

      I agree that race in inconsequential here or it appears to be.

  15. Rick Bentley

    “inconsequential”?

    There’s a belief that black men are seen as an active threat, and handled differently, than white men.

    I don’t think we could say it’s inconsequential to the incident itself, the media coverage of it, or the way people see the incident.

  16. Scout

    Prince William was flirting with this kind of problem under Sheriff Stoffregen. People could “buy” deputy status by contributing to his campaign war chest, and the Sheriff’s department had accumulated a bunch of nifty toys (including boats for river use), some of which, as I understand, were paid for by contributions. The sheriff was running traffic stops and other activities tat essentially created a parallel police force. Fortunately, the then Chairman of the BOCS had a strong commitment to a professional police force for the County and felt that the Sheriff’s role was confined to jail and court security, and writ service and was willing to endure a bitter fight to put the Sheriff’s department back in its box.

Comments are closed.