BSO Believes Men Went On Crime Spree After Standoff
Official Says BSO Pulled Out Of Standoff To Prevent Escalation

POSTED: 7:12 p.m. EDT August 23, 2005
UPDATED: 10:25 p.m. EDT August 23, 2005


Story by nbc6.net

POMPANO BEACH, Fla. -- Two men are accused of going on a crime spree days after Broward sheriff's deputies had them cornered during a standoff.

Last Tuesday evening, Broward sheriff's deputies had a standoff with Benitho Saintval and Jeffrey Willmington, both 18. Saintval was wanted for strong-armed robbery and Willmington was wanted for probation violation.

The two men refused to come out of the house in Pompano Beach and threatened that they would shoot if deputies came in and that there were three pit bulls inside with them.

In light of recent controversial SWAT situation, like one in Sunrise that left a 23-year-old man dead, BSO officials said they decided to pull back before the situation escalated.

"If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO.

BSO deputies planned to pick up their suspects the next day, but never did.

Police said they believe Saintval and Willmington then went on a crime spree. One alleged victim was Floyd Cornette, 75, of Delray Beach.

"They jumped out with ski masks to show me they meant business. They hit my head with a gun," Cornette said.

The suspects, who detectives believe might be Saintval and Willmington, grabbed Cornette by his arms, pushed him to the side and took off in his car.

The suspects then headed to Deerfield Beach, where they allegedly robbed a man and woman at gunpoint outside a local restaurant, beating the man repeatedly with the gun.

BSO believes Saintval and Willmington might be responsible, not only for these two armed robberies, but possibly several others.

"Hindsight is 20-20. Had we known they would hurt other people, we probably would have gone in and taken them out dead or alive," Leljedal said.

The two men were eventually arrested on Saturday in Boca Raton. Police said they were in a stolen car.

Saintval and Willmington are now in jail in Palm Beach County, but will likely return to Broward County to face charges.

Damned if you do, Damned if you dont...

Didn't THEY (the criminals) escalate it when they threatened the deputies with bodily harm?

Though a warrant for strong-arm robbery is hardly insignificant...it was no longer just "insignificant warrants." It had become resisting arrest, terroristic threats, obstruction of justice, etc, etc, etc.

Robbery is not insignificant.

Why didn't they just pepper grenade the place and wait for them to come out?

Why was the decision kill them or leave?

Should have just nuked the house. Stupid bastards! You can see where the police are coming from though. Had they gone in there and done what they were supposed to do then they would be in the middle of a news scandal calling them "kid killers" and they'd be brought up on charges. Sad but true.

I noticed one line wasn't bolded:

BSO deputies planned to pick up their suspects the next day, but never did.

-1 for the sheriffs.  I dont care how insignificant the original warrants were, if they threaten to shoot a cop they'll threaten to shoot a civilian which they did.  

Quoted: I noticed one line wasn't bolded: BSO deputies planned to pick up their suspects the next day, but never did.

So if SWAT can't get them, you think patrol officers should?

It's like saying we were going to attack a hostile nation with a carrier task force, but it was tooo dangerous, maybe we'll send an FFG in there tommorrow....................

Quoted: "If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO.

Well, you know, he does kinda have a point there.  

Quoted: Quoted: "If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO. Well, you know, he does kinda have a point there.

Plus, we would have had two more dead dogs to fuel the Arfcom "cops will shoot your dog" motif...

- AG

Quoted: Quoted: I noticed one line wasn't bolded: BSO deputies planned to pick up their suspects the next day, but never did. So if SWAT can't get them, you think patrol officers should? It's like saying we were going to attack a hostile nation with a carrier task force, but it was tooo dangerous, maybe we'll send an FFG in there tommorrow....................

Who said anything about Patrol Officers? Don't assume. You could just as easily use your high risk team pick them up when they left the house. Wasn't that a LL from Waco? If you can't go in, wait for them to come out. They have to come out sometime.

Sounds like the sheriff tried to handle it like Andy Taylor and instead the badguys made the whole agency look like Barney Fife.

Well we've had the debate about the militarization of the police being the death of the Republic;  now we see what happens when the police become "sensitive", non confrontational and seek alternatives to force.
God forbid those cops storm the barricaded fortress with class 3 weapons!  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I noticed one line wasn't bolded: BSO deputies planned to pick up their suspects the next day, but never did. So if SWAT can't get them, you think patrol officers should? It's like saying we were going to attack a hostile nation with a carrier task force, but it was tooo dangerous, maybe we'll send an FFG in there tommorrow.................... Who said anything about Patrol Officers? Don't assume. You could just as easily use your high risk team pick them up when they left the house. Wasn't that a LL from Waco? If you can't go in, wait for them to come out. They have to come out sometime.

Because I work for a department that has a team that makes very few entries, and has in fact exhausted themselves on hours long perimeters, and been replaced by as few as 1 patrol officer.

In one case they responded to a reported shot fired, put up a perimeter for hours, then left. There was shooting hours later, and another departments team showed up, it took them like 30 seconds to deploy gas and force entry.

That's why the un-official name for our team is "the containment team".

Next, "they will shoot if we enter"................... I have a hard time the "shooting" threat is dependent on a geographical component...............

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I noticed one line wasn't bolded: BSO deputies planned to pick up their suspects the next day, but never did. So if SWAT can't get them, you think patrol officers should? It's like saying we were going to attack a hostile nation with a carrier task force, but it was tooo dangerous, maybe we'll send an FFG in there tommorrow.................... Who said anything about Patrol Officers? Don't assume. You could just as easily use your high risk team pick them up when they left the house. Wasn't that a LL from Waco? If you can't go in, wait for them to come out. They have to come out sometime.

I beleive the Sheriff was afraid the bad guys would force an armed confrontation if they surrounded the house to wait them out.  Additionally, what do you imagine the costs to the taxpers are of surrounding a house 24/7 until the occupants surrender? Keeping in mind that surrender in this incident would likely mean a running gun battle outside the house.  Where do you put the neighbors during the standoff? motel 6,  the Hilton?  Who answers the calls for service for the officers stuck on the perimeter for a week, a month, 3 months.

Quoted: In light of recent controversial SWAT situation, like one in Sunrise that left a 23-year-old man dead, BSO officials said they decided to pull back before the situation escalated.

Cool.  Decisions based on ARFCOM postings.

Quoted: Quoted: "If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO. Well, you know, he does kinda have a point there.

Again, robbery is not "insignificant."

Quoted: Who said anything about Patrol Officers? Don't assume. You could just as easily use your high risk team pick them up when they left the house. Wasn't that a LL from Waco? If you can't go in, wait for them to come out. They have to come out sometime. I beleive the Sheriff was afraid the bad guys would force an armed confrontation if they surrounded the house to wait them out.  Additionally, what do you imagine the costs to the taxpers are of surrounding a house 24/7 until the occupants surrender? Keeping in mind that surrender in this incident would likely mean a running gun battle outside the house.  Where do you put the neighbors during the standoff? motel 6,  the Hilton?  Who answers the calls for service for the officers stuck on the perimeter for a week, a month, 3 months.

Can't they back up, keep an eye open from a distance and take them once unawares while getting gas or buying (who am kidding robbing ) some twinkies?  Let them think they are sneaking off.

Quoted: [Because I work for a department that has a team that makes very few entries, and has in fact exhausted themselves on hours long perimeters, and been replaced by as few as 1 patrol officer. In one case they responded to a reported shot fired, put up a perimeter for hours, then left. There was shooting hours later, and another departments team showed up, it took them like 30 seconds to deploy gas and force entry. That's why the un-official name for our team is "the containment team". Next, "they will shoot if we enter"................... I have a hard time the "shooting" threat is dependent on a geographical component...............

That's probably too laid back.

If they would have went in, I wouldn't have had a problem with it. If they picked up the guys the next day, I wouldn't have a problem with it. I just ask the police be reasonable in their actions. Like double-checking the address/intel before an entry. In this case, when the occupants are threatening to shoot the police and the residence is already contained, I'd say the chance of getting the wrong address is pretty much nil.

I understand the desire to contain them and take care of the suspects in a building, less chance of stray bullets hurting someone who is innocent. However, I think the tactic of "snatch and grab" is under utiliized. I keep thinking about my dog trying to get into a beaver hole. The beaver has the advantage. Whereas, if the beaver is out in the open;he's toast.

Quoted: Quoted: Who said anything about Patrol Officers? Don't assume. You could just as easily use your high risk team pick them up when they left the house. Wasn't that a LL from Waco? If you can't go in, wait for them to come out. They have to come out sometime. I beleive the Sheriff was afraid the bad guys would force an armed confrontation if they surrounded the house to wait them out.  Additionally, what do you imagine the costs to the taxpers are of surrounding a house 24/7 until the occupants surrender? Keeping in mind that surrender in this incident would likely mean a running gun battle outside the house.  Where do you put the neighbors during the standoff? motel 6,  the Hilton?  Who answers the calls for service for the officers stuck on the perimeter for a week, a month, 3 months. Can't they back up, keep an eye open from a distance and take them once unawares while getting gas or buying (who am kidding robbing ) some twinkies?  Let them think they are sneaking off.

To be fair, AR15fan didn't say that, I did.  

Who said anything about surrounding the house? I said pick them up the next day. It's called surveillance. They're not coming out if  there is a bunch of cops around.

My point, in response to OLY's post, is if the only tool you have is a hammer(entry) then all of your problems look like nails.

Quoted: Quoted: Who said anything about Patrol Officers? Don't assume. You could just as easily use your high risk team pick them up when they left the house. Wasn't that a LL from Waco? If you can't go in, wait for them to come out. They have to come out sometime. I beleive the Sheriff was afraid the bad guys would force an armed confrontation if they surrounded the house to wait them out.  Additionally, what do you imagine the costs to the taxpers are of surrounding a house 24/7 until the occupants surrender? Keeping in mind that surrender in this incident would likely mean a running gun battle outside the house.  Where do you put the neighbors during the standoff? motel 6,  the Hilton?  Who answers the calls for service for the officers stuck on the perimeter for a week, a month, 3 months. Can't they back up, keep an eye open from a distance and take them once unawares while getting gas or buying (who am kidding robbing ) some twinkies?  Let them think they are sneaking off.

Sure.  Figure two officers for the surveilance, working 12 hour shifts.  Plus 4 officers for the take down cars.  Thats 12 cops pulled out of patrol for the duration of the operation.  Thier positions will have to be backfilled with overtime. How long is the county board of supervisors willing to fund this operation?Plus you are taking the huge chance that they slip away undected by the surveilance team.  Or start a gunfight in a crowded minimart during the twinkie run take down.

Taking them down in their own house, which minimizes the risk to innocent bystanders is really the best approach.

Quoted: I understand the desire to contain them and take care of the suspects in a building, less chance of stray bullets hurting someone who is innocent. However, I think the tactic of "snatch and grab" is under utiliized. I keep thinking about my dog trying to get into a beaver hole. The beaver has the advantage. Whereas, if the beaver is out in the open;he's toast.

Snatch and Grab, also mean you have to be able to watch the house, apartment biulding, etc. 24/7 360 degrees. Which gets tougher with an enclosed garage etc, or mutiple vehicle leaving.

It's also just about imposible to pull off w/o alerting everyone not only in the target residence, but entire neighborhood. Like none of the neighbors will assist with the counter surviellance...........

Plus it means having a team geared up, sitting, ready to move in seconds.......... also may be tough to get an actual team type deployment, in the chaos of a traffic stop.

Not to mention the difficulty explaining how a suspect that was pinned in a house, was allowed to stay there, then tried to get away, and a high speed pursuit ensued.................

So it's either:

A) Go in guns blazing killing anything that moves.

or

B) Go home and watch CSI: Miami, and stop by the next day and pick em' up.

WTF

The Fallujah strategy lives!

At least the JBT's didn't write any revenue tickets

and the dogs are safe.

My biggest criteria with criminals/swat deployment is that they get the address right. A felony arrest for robbery, be it armed or strongarm, I have NO problem with. Sounds as if they knew the correct address on this one. Had a good friend that used to work for Broward Sheriff dept. Quit in disgust, said it was nothing but a political nightmare.

Quoted: Quoted: "If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO. Well, you know, he does kinda have a point there.

Negative.   That is why it is called a stand-off.   Surround the place and wait them out.

Period.

If they threaten to "shoot a cop" then "they"  escalated it, not the cops.   Wait as long as it takes.   No reason to go in, there were no hostages.   Wait them out, they will get tired and thirsty after the water and electricity are cut off.  

Letting them go is tantamount to cowardice.     Especially in light of what they did after they failed to go back and get them the next day.  

Some days I wonder about my brother LEO supervisors.  

The policy for ur "special teams" includes a line about "take no precipitous action............"

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO. Well, you know, he does kinda have a point there.   Plus, we would have had two more dead dogs to fuel the Arfcom "cops will shoot your dog" motif... - AG

I thought it was the "Arfcom 'cops will shoot your dog' " ambience.

So which is it?  A motif or ambience?

Jake.

P.S. Kidding.  Just watched KotH "Full Metal Dust Jacket" again last night, so it's still fresh on my mind.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO. Well, you know, he does kinda have a point there.   Negative.   That is why it is called a stand-off.   Surround the place and wait them out. Period. If they threaten to "shoot a cop" then "they"  escalated it, not the cops.   Wait as long as it takes.   No reason to go in, there were no hostages.   Wait them out, they will get tired and thirsty after the water and electricity are cut off.   Letting them go is tantamount to cowardice.     Especially in light of what they did after they failed to go back and get them the next day.   Some days I wonder about my brother LEO supervisors.

Not really saying they were right to just punch out and call it a day, just that they kinda get put in a damned if you do, damned if you don't spot these days.  

As for the cost of sitting back and waiting, I'd have to ask two guys threaten to shoot any cop that enters their home, and some commision is going to snipe the call to sit back and wait on the basis of cost?  I could understand the increased risk of a public shootout but how much does it cost to loose the lead man though the door when the subjects are ready to shoot any cop that they get a chance to?

The two men refused to come out of the house in Pompano Beach and threatened that they would shoot if deputies came in and that there were three pit bulls inside with them. ... "Hindsight is 20-20. Had we known they would hurt other people, we probably would have gone in and taken them out dead or alive," Leljedal said.

Sounds a little strange unless you consider the threat to shoot someone as not hurting other people. Does florida not have any CS canisters?

BSO is f-up.

That Lt. is a piece of shit and his comment on the subject is even worse!!  They should put his head on a platter.

Why does it have to be all or nothing... go in and kill them all or just go away?  Are there not middle ground?  Cut off the electricity to the house, I mean its like 95 degrees with bright sun and 90+% humidity... they would have came out in an hour or two.
 

 

They should have surrounded the house, put up the loudspeakers and strobelights, played Kumbaya by Insane Clown Posse over and over, put CS gas grenades through the windows....and waited them out!

Or....
Nuke em from orbit! It's the only way to be sure!

Fiancee: Shooting victim 'never hurt anyone'

By ED KEMMICK
Of The Gazette Staff

Danielle Callahan wants people to know that her fiancôUwho died Friday night in a shootout with his parole officer and Billings police officers, was not a bad person.

"He was never the way he's made out to be," she said Monday. "He never hurt anyone but himself. They make him out to be this horrible, horrible person. He's just the opposite. ? He'd do anything and everything he could to help someone else."

Justin Toland, 25, was shot in the chest shortly after 10:30 p.m. Friday in the parking lot outside a gas station-casino at Grand Avenue and Shiloh Road. Police say Toland pulled a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun when his parole officer and three police officers tried to arrest him on a warrant for parole violation.

During a brief exchange of gunfire, Police Capt. Dave Hinkle said, Toland fired six shots and the officers got off eight shots. Toland was pronounced dead at Deaconess Billings Clinic. No one else was injured.

After the shooting, Deputy Police Chief Rich St. John said Toland had been wanted for several weeks and was known to be armed. St. John said police were also aware that Toland had said in the past that he would rather die in a shootout than go back to prison.

Callahan talked about her fiancíŸonday at the home of two good friends, Shane and Misty Waddingham. The four of them had been inseparable since Toland and Callahan met two years ago. Shane Waddingham said Toland was his best friend.

What hurts the worst, Waddingham said, is knowing that his friend died alone.

"The people that he loved and the people that loved him weren't around to say goodbye," he said. "He didn't deserve to die like this. He didn't deserve to die, period."

His friends said the situation should have been handled in a different way, but they don't deny that Toland bears a lot of responsibility for his own death. But Toland, like all of them, had struggled with methamphetamine, which makes people do terrible things.

"Dope is bad news and he knew it," Shane Waddingham said. "That's what sucked so bad is he knew it."

According to his friends, Toland was sentenced to prison five years ago for possession of meth. He served 15-1/2 months in prison in Deer Lodge before being released three years ago. He found a job at the Kwik Way at Broadwater Avenue and 15th Street West shortly after his release from prison and within 2-1/2 years he was managing the store, Waddingham said.

He was also off drugs and working hard. In addition to the Kwik Way job, he held down part-time jobs that included working at a pizza parlor, a lawn service and an auto detailing shop. He regularly worked 70 hours a week, Waddingham said.

"He never did anything half-ass," he said. "That was part of his problem."

Sometime this summer, Toland started using meth again. After he tested positive for drugs in a urinalysis test, he was charged with a parole violation and possession of drug paraphernalia. He was in jail from July 12 to July 18 and was supposed to appear in Municipal Court on the possession charge on Aug. 9.

He skipped that hearing, Callahan said, which is apparently what triggered the warrant for his arrest. His parole officer, Charlie Martin, was involved the shootout and has been placed on paid leave. Mike Ferriter, head of the Adult Community Corrections Division of the Department of Corrections, said he didn't know any details of Toland's case.

He also said he didn't know why Martin decided to try arresting Toland outside the casino Friday night. However Martin came to the decision, he called for police backup when he spotted Toland, and was soon joined by patrol officer Ronda Fox and detectives Jim Woog and Ken Paharik.

Fox, Woog and Martin all fired their guns during the shootout. Paharik did not because he was busy protecting a man who unwittingly drove his Jeep Wagoneer onto the scene just before the bullets started to fly. Paharik grabbed the man out of his Jeep, threw him to the ground and lay on top of him to protect him, St. John said.

Hinkle said "our indications are" that Toland fired the first shot, after being told repeatedly to drop his gun. All three police officers, like Martin, are on paid leave until they feel capable of returning to work, St. John said. The shooting is being investigated by police detectives, who will turn over their findings to the County Attorney's Office to determine whether criminal charges are appropriate.

Toland's friends say they don't see why Martin felt it was necessary to arrest Toland at the casino when Toland had been at work nearly every day until just five days before the shooting.

City Councilman Dick Clark, general manager for Kwik Way in Montana, confirmed that Toland continued working at the store on Broadwater until Sunday, Aug. 14. After that, Clark said, he just stopped showing up for work.

"They should focus on arresting people that are hurting other people," Callahan said. "He was just hurting himself. You know, he didn't go and rob places. He didn't go and beat people up for the fun of it. He was just hurting himself, not no one else."

Waddingham, 30, who served time in prison in Wyoming on marijuana charges and in Montana for possession of meth, said his friend knew that he wasn't likely to go back to prison on the latest charges. He had been told that he would be placed on intensive supervision and forced to go into treatment for his meth addiction.

But there's no telling what Toland was thinking under the influence of meth, which is known to induce paranoia, delusions and violent behavior. And when the cops showed up at the casino, Waddingham said, who knows what was going through Toland's mind.

Waddingham said Toland's worst fear wasn't prison; it was disappointing his grandparents, who live in Billings and helped raise him.

"He knew he messed up," Waddingham said. "When he got out of jail, he was afraid of losing everything he had."

Shortly after getting out of jail, on July 22, Toland went to the county courthouse with Callahan to get a marriage license. Callahan said Toland didn't have the right birth certificate, and so they'd been planning to get married as soon as he rounded up the proper documents.

Misty Waddingham, Shane's wife, who is also on probation on meth-possession charges, said the real culprit is the drug, and the lack of an effective community response to it.

She said she started doing meth 14 years ago, at the age of 10, and didn't kick the habit until two years ago. The first time she went in for treatment, she said, she was told she'd have to wait 2-1/2 months to get into a program.

"You need to get them into treatment as soon as somebody asks for help," she said. "You don't tell them they need to wait."

If treatment is hard to come by in Billings, meth never was, she said.

"It's so easy," she said. "When I was little it was easier for me to go out and get dope than it was for me to get cigarettes."

Her husband agreed.

"Meth is a huge frickin' problem in this town," he said. "It's the biggest problem this town has."

________________________________________________________________________________

Why don't you arrest him when he goes out....................... Because if you do, and deadly force is used, someone will want to know why he was arrested at home, or work..............

Hindsight being 20/20.............. and the police at fault, not the suspect.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "If they had kicked the door down, shot the dogs and killed the two 18-year-olds, we would be sitting here (and) I would have to answer to you why they were the killed over insignificant warrants," said Jim Leljedal, of BSO. Well, you know, he does kinda have a point there.   Negative.   That is why it is called a stand-off.   Surround the place and wait them out. Period. If they threaten to "shoot a cop" then "they"  escalated it, not the cops.   Wait as long as it takes.   No reason to go in, there were no hostages.   Wait them out, they will get tired and thirsty after the water and electricity are cut off.   Letting them go is tantamount to cowardice.     Especially in light of what they did after they failed to go back and get them the next day.   Some days I wonder about my brother LEO supervisors.   Not really saying they were right to just punch out and call it a day, just that they kinda get put in a damned if you do, damned if you don't spot these days.   As for the cost of sitting back and waiting, I'd have to ask two guys threaten to shoot any cop that enters their home, and some commision is going to snipe the call to sit back and wait on the basis of cost?  I could understand the increased risk of a public shootout but how much does it cost to loose the lead man though the door when the subjects are ready to shoot any cop that they get a chance to?

Law enforcement is not always cut and dried.   But standing up to criminals is.   Wait them out cost much less than letting them go and committing more crime.    

How much is the hospital bill for the guy who got hit in the head ?   Since the LEO backed away, at their own peril, I would sue them for the damages.  

Title 18 USC 42 - Basically, LEO's cannot be sued for failing to protect you.  Especially if they did not respond to the house in the first place.   But, if they had the suspects contained and let them go, especially in light of an implied threat of violence, that is another story.   They failed to do there job = Lawsuit.   At least it does here in the PC California.   FWIW

Give the people what they want.

Quoted: Fiancee: Shooting victim 'never hurt anyone' By ED KEMMICK Of The Gazette Staff SNIP Hindsight being 20/20.............. and the police at fault, not the suspect.

Nope, he was gonna though. HAHA!

Quoted: BSO is f-up. That Lt. is a piece of shit and his comment on the subject is even worse!!  They should put his head on a platter. Why does it have to be all or nothing... go in and kill them all or just go away?  Are there not middle ground?  Cut off the electricity to the house, I mean its like 95 degrees with bright sun and 90+% humidity... they would have came out in an hour or two.

and if they dont?  If it turns into a extended standoff, how long are you willing to pay the police to wait? How long could the members of our own survival forum stay in their homes?  Unencumbered by age, women or children and assisted by three guard dogs? Rotating watch shifts with the dogs placed in various parts of the house to warn of an approach and they couldstay as long as their food and water last.

OLY,
Good points. I don't necessarily agree. But you're correct there are many tactical hurdles to jump. There has to be a middle ground somewhere. There has to be more than just "storm 'em" or "let 'em go" as options. I think the TTP in police work has focused too much on the hardware, my profession does it too BTW not knocking the police, and not enough on the "software."

Quoted: Well we've had the debate about the militarization of the police being the death of the Republic;  now we see what happens when the police become "sensitive", non confrontational and seek alternatives to force. God forbid those cops storm the barricaded fortress with class 3 weapons!

That debate still rages in the Pit.

I could only imagine the comments if the perps and dogs were shot.

Quoted: Quoted: BSO is f-up. That Lt. is a piece of shit and his comment on the subject is even worse!!  They should put his head on a platter. Why does it have to be all or nothing... go in and kill them all or just go away?  Are there not middle ground?  Cut off the electricity to the house, I mean its like 95 degrees with bright sun and 90+% humidity... they would have came out in an hour or two.     and if they dont?  If it turns into a extended standoff, how long are you willing to pay the police to wait? How long could the members of our own survival forum stay in their homes?  Unencumbered by age, women or children and assisted by three guard dogs? Rotating watch shifts with the dogs placed in various parts of the house to warn of an approach and they couldstay as long as their food and water last.

So what kind of time limit should cops put on these things? 3 hours? or maybe 4?
Should it be calculated  by $$ or man-hour?
BTW, how much do you thinks the old man's hospital bills came to?

 

This was a setup by the police.. See what happens when we don't use lethal force.. Now no one can question them. The police new that robbery was not insignificant. The police new who and what kind of persons were in the house. The police new they were probably armed.

What everybody is bitching about on excessive force is when.. The police execute a warrant for a bag of pot.. The info they received was from a informant who is trying to save his or her own ass. BUT they go into a house in the middle of the night and shoot someone who is trying to protect themselves from a home invasion.

Quoted: This was a setup by the police.. See what happens when we don't use lethal force.. Now no one can question them. The police new that robbery was not insignificant.

Robbery is not insignificant? What kind of robbery was this? Was it a shoplifter who fled with a carton of cigarettes and shoved a store employee on his way out? Not exactly significant compared to beating an old lady senseless and stealing her social security money now is it? Both are considered "strongarm" robberies but one is much more significant than the other.

Quoted: The info they received was from a informant who is trying to save his or her own ass. BUT they go into a house in the middle of the night and shoot someone who is trying to protect themselves from a home invasion.

Please post some examples of the above.

Folks, this is the same reason why we can't just up and withdraw from Iraq too. That would be equally stupid.

Quoted: Quoted: The info they received was from a informant who is trying to save his or her own ass. BUT they go into a house in the middle of the night and shoot someone who is trying to protect themselves from a home invasion. Please post some examples of the above.

I going to do what everyone else does to me.. GO to the top of the page and use the search button.

Almost everytime the police use signifigant force, there are people complaining that the police shouldn't have done what they did, the way they did, at the time they did. Very few instances of police use of deadly force, flashbangs, etc. etc. get reported in the press, or in public opinion with a big thumbs up.

The police are often told in the media, Court (by the defense........), and public opinion, that they should have taken steps to NOT use force, sometimes the demand is that the police go to EXTRAODINARY steps to avoid the use of signifigant force.

When the police follow that advice..............................................................

Quoted: At least the JBT's didn't write any revenue tickets and the dogs are safe.

That's true.  All the dogs went home, and, noone had to pay a fine.

There is a big difference between killing someone in a no-knock raid and raiding a house where the suspects have been asked to comply, the suspects were warned, and then the suspects responded with threats of violence.  How in the world the police decided that it was a good idea to leave and come back later is beyond me.  

Gee, they say they are going to shoot us now, maybe tomorrow they will be more compliant...if they are even still there.  Another reason not to leave your own safety in the hands of others.