Police Shooting in NY: Groom Killed On Wedding Day(Updated)[Merged] (3 Viewers)

[Det. Brees]

NYC Mayor: 'Deeply Disturbed' by 'Excessive Force' in Cops' Bridegroom Shoot
Monday, 27 November 2006


((Thanks, Mayor. I guess I didn't realize you'd also been elected to be judge, jury and high executioner,

too. Ron))



ABC News

Mayor Michael Bloomberg was "deeply disturbed" by the barrage of gunfire unleashed by officers in a weekend shooting that killed a groom on his wedding day, the mayor said Monday.

"I can tell you that it is to me unacceptable or inexplicable how you can have 50-odd shots fired, but that's up to the investigation to find out what really happened," Bloomberg said after meeting with community leaders at City Hall.

Bloomberg was joined by Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, the Rev. Al Sharpton, Rep. Charles Rangel and several other officials at the meeting.

Sharpton called it a "very candid, a very blunt meeting." He said the message to Bloomberg was: "This city must show moral outrage that 50 shots were fired on three unarmed men."

Bloomberg was steadfast in his support for Kelly, who has been denounced by some community leaders over the shooting.

"I think he's the best police commissioner the city has ever had," Bloomberg said. "Nobody takes this more seriously than Commissioner Kelly and I do."

in this article it seems what he is upset about is the number of shot fired not the fact that a moving vehicle was fired upon.....

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

i find this very interresting , because every article so for states the driver drove into the unmarked car before shots were fired. mmmmm
i cant wait to hear what is going on........

It doesn't matter if the shots were fired before or after the car drove into the police car... according to that article it is against NYPD policy to ever shoot at a moving car unless someone from the car is shooting at them -- since there was no gun in the car, the cops broke policy. Period.

 

[Det. Brees]

It doesn't matter if the shots were fired before or after the car drove into the police car... according to that article it is against NYPD policy to ever shoot at a moving car unless someone from the car is shooting at them -- since there was no gun in the car, the cops broke policy. Period.

thats not what there policy says. the policy says you can not fire into or from a moving vehicle unless there is force being used against the officers and driving a car into them is deadly force. just about every dept. in the country has this policy

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

thats not what there policy says. the policy says you can not fire into or from a moving vehicle unless there is force being used against the officers and driving a car into them is deadly force. just about every dept. in the country has this policy

Where do you find that policy from the NYPD? According to the article the policy is:

police officers "shall not discharge their firearms at or from a moving vehicle unless force is being used against the police officers or another person present, by means other than a moving vehicle."

so that means that even if the car is driving at the police officers they cannot fire at it, unless some other weapon is being used. And that policy is not uncommon. I did some research on this after the IHOP shooting here in Virginia a year ago. Shooting at a moving vehicle is allowed in Virginia if the cop feels threatened, but it is not allowed in DC. It's pretty scattered all over the country.

 

[Det. Brees]

let me clear up what im trying to say.
policies are written and changed every month and we recieve the updates throughout the year. one facter that is always present is policies are guidlines the officers and the dept must go by but they are flexable due to the nature of evets. that has been ruled on in a court of law. specifically that ruling stats that no guideline or policy can deny a officer the right to defend himself when deadly force is being used against him or her.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

let me clear up what im trying to say.
policies are written and changed every month and we recieve the updates throughout the year. one facter that is always present is policies are guidlines the officers and the dept must go by but they are flexable due to the nature of evets. that has been ruled on in a court of law. specifically that ruling stats that no guideline or policy can deny a officer the right to defend himself when deadly force is being used against him or her.

That's fine - and I completely agree that protecting your life falls above a policy, but in this case, I think it means that the burden of proof falls to the officers to prove that they only way to defend themselves was to unload 50 rounds (including changing clips) into a car that had no other weapon in it, when the current policy is to never shoot a car unless there is another weapon involved.

The reason the policy against shooting a moving vehicle is in place in lots of jurisdictions is that there a dozens of things that can happen and only 2 of them are good. It is believed by many police departments that in most cases shooting at a moving vehicle is a bad way to resolve the situation. That appears to be the case with the NYPD.

So, since NYPD policy is to not shoot at a moving vehicle, and the officers did shoot at a moving vehicle, they have to explain why the violated that policy. It may be that there was no possible way for them to move out of the way of the moving vehicle and that it continued to move after they fired say 20 rounds, necessitating more firing. If that's the case, then they acted properly. If not, then they should be disciplined accordingly (depending on what the facts were).

 

[Det. Brees]

i agree with you on that uncle....
there are always circumstances that can give justification to violate policy, and the whole truth we do not know and probably will only find out if this goes before a court.

 

[THAJCODE]

...which it looks like it will.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Here's what I was able to figure out from Geraldo last night on Hannity and Colmes. Obviously Geraldo is not an official police source but he's been heavily involved and here's his version of events:

1. The group of under cover officers were part of a NYC Club Crime division and were undercover at the club. At least one of them had some drinks in the club.

2. The groom and his crew got into an argument in the club with some people and on the way out one of the cops heard one of them say go get my gun.

3. One of the undercover cops followed them out.

4. They got in their car and started to pull out of the parking lot.

5. OK, here's where the story gets unbelievable... and undercover cop jumps on the hood of their car with his gun out and orders them out of the car.

6. They accelerate hitting the undercover van which was a Dodge Caravan with no markings.

7. The guy was on the hood is knocked off and starts shooting, everyone else follows.

At this point, if this is even close to correct, I'm thinking the problem is really the guy on the hood. The other officers were probably just reacting to him without even fully knowing what was going on. You see a fellow officer unloading on a car and you assume they have weapons and he's fighting for his life.

Anyway, I'm still not forming an opinion until all the facts are out but I have yet to hear anything that makes me believe this wasn't a huge over reaction by at least one of these cops.

 

[Det. Brees]

update on ny shooting

the other thread has been pushed to the way side and i want everyone to see this.
it appears now after all 3 persons and there lawyer have denied a 4 person he has been found. it has also been released that there maybe video of this incident.



UPDATE: 4th Man Had Gun
Saturday, 02 December 2006
New York Post
By MURRAY WEISS

Investigators have located a witness who spotted the mysterious "fourth man" holding a gun outside the car that cops fired 50 shots into last week, law-enforcement sources told The Post yesterday.

The witness identified Jean "Mo" Nelson as the gun-toting man who fled the scene of the shooting that killed groom-to-be Sean Bell outside a Queens strip club on the morning of his wedding.

But Nelson's lawyer adamantly denies he was armed - several detectives at the scene have told sources that they did not know if the fourth man was inside the vehicle.

Nelson, 27, was identified by law-enforcement sources yesterday as the man wearing a beige jacket who witnesses say fled the South Jamaica scene.

Witnesses, including the one who claims to have seen Nelson with the gun, allegedly also told investigators they saw the undercover cop, who later opened fire, lean over the hood of the car with badge in hand and identify himself.

The witnesses, who have provided the information to investigators on the case being handled by the Queens District Attorney's Office and the NYPD's Internal Affairs Bureau, said they saw the undercover cop fall twice while escaping Bell's speeding car before opening fire.

Nelson's lawyer, Charles King, yesterday confirmed that Nelson did see the shooting and was near Bell's car, but said his client "did not have a gun, nor was he in the car as police have suggested."

The discovery of the fourth man appeared only to add to the conflicting stories about the slaying of Bell, 23, on his wedding day.


http://www.lineofduty.com/content/view/80983/26/

 

[ULSaint]

Here's a question that hasn't been asked. Who has a batchelor party the night before their wedding? Aren't those usually a week or two before and at least a day before?

The dude was out at 4 a.m. the day before he was going to get married? That's odd imo.

 

[THAJCODE]

He's a party animal.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Here's a question that hasn't been asked. Who has a batchelor party the night before their wedding? Aren't those usually a week or two before and at least a day before?

The dude was out at 4 a.m. the day before he was going to get married? That's odd imo.

Most people I know have theirs the night before. I've thrown two, both the night before, and will be throwing one in July the night before. It's fun to see how bad of a hangover you can have your friend standing up at the front of the church with. :_rofl:

My buddy got married in Hawaii and we threw him his the night before. He made it through the wedding OK. During the reception he'd stop by our table every now and then to curse us out for the massive headache he had.