Before discussing the fatal shooting by police officers in Mililani a week or so ago, let’s make one thing perfectly clear. First, Hawaii does not have a death penalty for any criminal offenses. And, second, even if we did, shoplifting would not be considered a capital offense eligible for that ultimate sanction.
HPD Chief Susan Ballard, at a press conference: “She said police were ‘reasonably certain’ the man they shot was the shoplifting suspect.”
Other news stories said the victim “fit the description” of the suspected shoplifter.
That’s a pretty flimsy basis for executing someone. So why should we accept any “explanations” of how and why police killed this “suspected” shoplifter?
Unfortunately, this problem is not new. And it stems from HPD’s reliance on a tactic that involves police officers surrounding a suspect’s vehicle with their own cars and then approaching the suspect on foot, immediately putting themselves at risk if the driver attempts to flee. It’s the tactic that immediately creates a situation in which the use of deadly force can be “justified” as a way to prevent harm to the officer, even if the officer created the danger by setting up the situation.
The same issue came up under similar circumstances back in 2014 (see ilind.net, “Could Honolulu police have avoided recent shootings?”).
At that time, I observed:
So we have more fatal police shootings than most mainland cities, and more than half of the shootings occur when police are confronting a car’s occupants.
Clearly, it’s a dangerous kind of encounter. The data suggest that perhaps there are other ways to handle these situations that reduce the number of times they turn lethal. Do other major police departments have different approaches to these confrontations? Are there “best practices” that have yet to be adopted here? Could the shootings have been avoided?
The makeup of the Honolulu Police Commission has changed dramatically since 2014. It’s time that the “new” commission exerted its oversight authority by identifying HPD’s policies and procedures for such situations, and examining them in light of “best practices” nationwide.
Honolulu is a relatively safe community with relatively low levels of serious violent crime. It shouldn’t be rocket science to reduce the number of officer involved shootings.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The solution is to take away their service pistols. That would be the catalyst for changing the way they try to apprehend suspects. They carry Tasers, steel batons and shotguns. If a suspect can’t be brought under control with those options in a traffic stop there’s something wrong with their tactics and proceedures.
Shoplifting is not a capital offense, but attempting to run somebody over with your truck after shoplifting does entitle that person to use deadly force in self-defense.
Shoplifting is not a license for attempted murder.
But it is the police tactic that escalated the situation into a lethal confrontation. And now there’s an additional question of whether non-uniformed officers should be using this tactic.
Our goal needs to be to protect our officers by not expecting them to assume such dangerous positions in cases triggered by relatively minor offenses.
They did not shoot him for shoplifting, but for trying to run over an officer with a truck.
“The driver reversed, striking one car, then accelerated forward at another officer, Ballard said. That’s when the two officers, one on the driver’s side and the other diving out of the way of the vehicle, discharged their firearms.”
https://www.civilbeat.org/2019/02/police-fatally-shoot-burglary-suspect-in-mililani/
Again, my point is that the police tactic of standing in the way of a vehicle like this escalates this kind of situation from a minor incident into a potentially lethal encounter. When the triggering incident is as minor as shoplifting—a nonviolent property crime—this is wholly inappropriate. HPD, if necessary with the assistance and oversight of the police commission, should be reviewing this tactical policy in light of “best practices” from other jurisdictions.
Even Chief Susan Ballard said it is unusual (but not ollegal) for plainclothes officers to respond to such a case; usually they call uniformed officers. How many dead for Feb?
The officer didn’t “create the situation”….the shoplifter did. The shoplifter basically robs a store then refuses the police demand to stop then attempts to use his vehicle as a weapon….he got what he deserved. He could have avoided his death by a: not being a thief or b: stopping and surrendering to the police as most normal people do when so ordered.
Lots of confusion here. He did not “rob” a store. Robbery is a more serious offense. He shoplifted. A minor crime. This police practice of standing in front of a suspect’s vehicle escalates what should have been a minor incident into a killing. That should not be allowed to be standard practice.
If you had to carry that heavy gun around all the time you’d be itching to use it too Ian.
We do not have the death penalty in Hawaii. However we do have a police force and laws against theft. In apprehending anyone, for any crime, the police are to be respected and heeded. Evasion of a lawful police order is a crime, and deliberate assault with a vehicle is a serious crime. The police have a right to effect a stop of a fleeing suspect by any means reasonably necessary. If they are assaulted they have a right to reply with proportionate force. I note that, nationwide, police are assaulted +/- 50,000 times per year and shoot and kill someone about 1,000 times a year, of which only about 300 or so are ruled not justifiable. So most assaults on police do not result in anyone’s death. However assault with a vehicle is virtually the same as assault with a deadly weapon. Every free citizen has a right of self defense and police are no different. Should they stop a suspect fleeing in a car some other way that stepping in front of him/her? Perhaps…. that is worth looking into. But even getting rammed by another car is a potentially deadly assault, so staying in their cars may not solve the problem.
Here are the guidelines for this situation according to a study guide developed by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
“If an officer has reason to believe that a driver or occupant poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others, he/she may fire at the driver or an occupant only when such shots are necessary to avoid death or serious physical injury to the officer or another, and only if the public safety benefits of using such force reasonably appear to outweigh any risk to the officer or the public, such as from a crash,
ricocheting bullets, or return fire from the subject or another person in the
vehicle. “
I’m with you totally on this issue, Ian. The police actions are inappropriate. The public should be concerned with HPD training, because it jeopardizes our safety, lives.
In adddition, the guide recommends the following regarding the location of the arresting officers regarding the officer’s car and the car of the person being apprehended
“The primary officer approaches the stopped vehicle on driver’s side, as follows:
“For safety, the officer(s) should not stand between their vehicle and the stopped vehicle. Later in the stop, the officer(s) should also not have the occupants of the stopped vehicle stand in this area either. Another vehicle could collide with the law enforcement vehicle injuring or killing anybody in front of it. “
Thank you for that cogent information. I suppose it is pretty close to “best practice” as we might get in this area of policing.
The suspect was suddenly surrounded by 3 unmarked police cars and a swarm of plainclothes officers. Did he comprehend it was the police? Did they properly identify themselves? Did he panic because it wasn’t clear that they were officers?
HPD should bring in an independent investigator to review the circumstances of this shooting. Especially as we are one of the only states without a civilian review board.
It’s not outrageous to believe that the Honolulu Police Department, as a whole, and possibly by policy, enjoys murdering suspects in cold blood.
Stupidity is the only truly capital crime. The sentence is usually carried out immediately and without mercy.
In Korea they issue police revolvers only when needed for the task. They have three bullets. The first one in the chamber is a blank. This is patrol officers. I would imagine detectives and such have different policy. It’s a different approach.
A good way to establish best practices is to look around the country. Incidents where suspects use vehicles as deadly weapons are reportedly rising. I am told that over the last 50 years, most police departments have had policies that have prohibited firing at a moving vehicle except under dire circumstances and these policies have loosened, then become more restrictive in some cases. Denver and LAPD’s policy says that an officer should stand aside from a threat from a moving vehicle and get out of the way before drawing their weapon. There have been lots of changes. LAPD modified their policy around 2010 and Denver in 2015. Who knows if more changes have happened. The Department of Justice frowns on shooting at vehicles. The Albuquerque PD came out with an order to quit shooting at moving vehicles when the DOJ came down on them for a pattern of too many shootings at vehicles by officers. The exception to all this is cases of terrorism by vehicle, i.e. mowing down pedestrians which is a dire situation. Maybe now that bodycams are coming there will be better evidence here as to what exactly the threat was in some of these instances. It seems amazing that an idiot like me can sit down at a computer and come up with full disclosure of written police policy regarding shooting at vehicles around the country at numerous police departments, yet does anyone know the written policy of HPD on this? A little sunlight on these things locally would help understand what is happening. Other questions, like why didn’t the plainclothes people follow the suspect and wait for a marked patrol unit to make the stop, but it could have been impractical for one reason or another.