It happened again last week. Honolulu police officers shot and killed a man who was trying to drive away after the officers attempted to serve a warrant. The man was identified as 45-year old Caillen Gentzler.
According to news accounts, two officers were attempting to serve a warrant at a public housing project in Ahuimanu, near Kaneohe. Gentzler ran, then got in his vehicle and tried to leave the scene. Officers were standing near the vehicle, and had to jump aside as when it reversed and then tried to leave. When Gentzler accelerated towards the officers, they fired. He was pronounced dead at Queen’s Medical Center.
Honolulu police have been involved in a string of similar shootings over the past five years or more, each following the same pattern. Suspect is in car, attempts to drive away, and is killed by officers who say their lives were threatened by the vehicle.
This has been a very controversial police tactic for a long time. In many jurisdictions, police are prohibited from using deadly force by shooting at a moving vehicle unless there is some threat other than the vehicle itself. If the driver is shooting at them, officers can shoot back. But positioning themselves in front of a vehicle to block it from leaving the scene, and then saying they were forced to deadly force to protect themselves, is prohibited.
Critics of such policies say shooting at moving vehicles is “a particularly dangerous and ineffective tactic.”
New York changed its police procedures nearly five decades ago.
…it banned shooting at moving vehicles altogether as long as the only physical threat was from the car, not another weapon. This means police would be justified in shooting at a moving car if the driver was firing a gun at them, but not if the car itself was the only danger to police or others.
The Police Executive Research Forum, which studies and advocates for policing policies, summarized the results: “That NYPD policy, adopted in 1972, resulted in an immediate, sharp reduction in uses of lethal force in New York City. Police shooting incidents declined from nearly 1,000 a year in 1972 to 665 the following year, and have fallen steadily ever since, to fewer than 100 per year today.” [“Police have known for 45 years they shouldn’t shoot at moving cars. But they still do it.,” VOX.com, May 8, 2017]
A report by the Guardian newspaper found widespread agreement that police should not shoot at moving vehicles, citing the US Department of Justice, policing experts, and “most major police departments across the U.S.”
In cases examined by the Guardian:
In all cases, officers said the vehicle posed a threat either to their own lives, to those of police colleagues, or to bystanders. In almost all incidents, however, their decisions to shoot appeared to run counter to federal guidance instructing officers to open fire only if a driver presents a separate deadly threat, such as a gun. None of those killed were accused of pointing firearms at police, and in only three cases did police appear to be aware of a gun being inside the vehicle.
The Police Executive Research Foundation recommends police departments “should adopt a prohibition against shooting at or from a moving vehicle unless someone in the vehicle is using or threatening deadly force by means other than the vehicle itself.” This is one of the group’s 30 Guiding Principles on Use of Force.
PERF reports:
The prohibition on shooting at moving vehicles is already in place in many agencies. It has been part of PERF’s use-of-force recommendations to indi- vidual agencies for years, and is included in the model use-of-force policy from the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Agencies with this policy cur- rently in effect include the following:
• New York Police Department (enacted in 1972)
• Boston Police Department
• Chicago Police Department
• Cincinnati Police Department
• Denver Police Department
• Philadelphia Police Department
• Washington, DC Metropolitan Police Department
It’s past time for Honolulu’s Police Commission to direct the department to revise its policies to generally prohibit this kind of deadly encounter. Officers should be trained not to step in front of a suspect’s vehicle, which can lead to the officer feeling they have to use deadly force to defend themselves.
See:
“Could Honolulu police have avoided recent shootings?” iLind.net, October 14, 2014.
“Latest HPD shooting again raises familiar questions,” December 4, 2016.
“Shoplifting is not a capital offense,” iLind.net, February 28, 2019.
“Hawaii should follow California in restricting HPD use of force,” iLind.net, August 25, 2019.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
C’mon man. Ian, your assertion is out there even for you. A moving vehicle being driven at you is a weapon of deadly force. Saying that officers should “be trained to jump out of the way” is almost laughable. What’s next? Training officers to jump out of the way at a loaded gun pointed at them?? This is no joke Ian.
I hope you’ll read some of the recommendations and the data they are based on.
The point made by other police departments is that officers too often put themselves in harms way by standing in thevway of a suspect’s vehicle, thereby creating a more dangerous situation for themselves and the suspect.
Yup. Sure seems HPD loves to jump in the way of moving vehicles so they can justify their shooting thrills.
Then there was the deputy who shot and killed a man for drinking beer, I think it was, from a bottle in a brown paper bag in the open breezeway at the state Capitol. Not hurting anyone. Dead now.
Good one! I’ve always wondered about that. What was the REAL story? and How was it put through the grinder of official-speak, obfuscation. . . but, TWO thoughts come to mind: 1. do they really have anybody SMART ENOUGH in the dept to write such things, or is there a TEMPPLATE (Sp) for such actions (like lawyers) where they simply fill inn the ‘facts’ and out spews an explanation?
That’s absolutely ridiculous. There was never any allegation that a deputy “shot and killed a man for drinking beer” at the Capitol. The allegation was that the deputy told the drinking man to the leave the area, and that the man then became agitated and attacked the deputy, who shot the man when the man began choking him and could very easily have killed the deputy or grabbed the deputy’s weapon and shot the deputy. These allegations are obviously subject to dispute or other interpretations.
But I’m very disappointed that Ian Lind would approve your baseless, reckless and inflammatory comment in this space. It diminishes his credibility substantially.
Very well researched and written, as usual.
I’m going to be unpopular, but didn’t this victim have a substantial rap sheet? CanNOT save everyone. The financial burden of extending lives of those who do not contribute falls squarely on the middle class, which has taken a huge knock in this last year.
We, the middle class, are going to have to make some tough decisions going fwd. impossible to keep cutting us off at the knees
So it’s up to the middle class to say who deserves to live and who doesn’t? Regardless of how morally upright they are? Sure hope you’re not one of those weekly churchgoing “Christians” that values life so much. Unborn life, that is.
Good point. And then he goes out on the highway, runs over a hedge, hits parked cars, destroys more property and plows into a civilian or two — charges all lumped together into an easier negotiated sentence.
This clearly shows the intimidating power of the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers (SHOPO) in setting police policy here.
Even the notoriously militant police unions of New York and Boston were not able to prevent their Police Commissioners from implementing this sane policy.
The balance of power between the Police Commission and SHOPO is all on the union’s side. The Caronavirus Overtime Scandal is just the latest example.
What if the police are truthful in this case and the car was being driven at them? Why is it necessary to assume that the police are lying or are otherwise not being reasonable? Sometimes there have to be consequences for reckless behavior that endangers lives. Do you know that the police officers had the option to position themselves out of the way of the car’s path or if the driver deliberately aimed the car at officers trying to avoid the car?
Ian is right. I have been researching a d writing about this issue since 2014. Roughly half of HPD’s shootings happen this way. They need to stop positioning themselves in front of moving vehicles. The continual nature of these events is an indication of depraved indifference on the part of HPD.
We do live on an ISLAND. It’s not like the perp could have driven off to the state line.
Ian, I believe that, if you reached out to HPD or even did an on-line search you will find that it is already established HPD policy requiring officers to approach a suspect’s vehicle from positions that are not directly in front of or behind the vehicle.
I did an online search in response to an earlier story about a police killing of a suspect fleeing in an automobile which appeared in the iLind.net blog some months back. As I reported at that time, I found that HPD guidance for detention and arrest procedures for suspects in automobiles was available on-line and that it specified that the officers were not to place themselves directly in front of or behind the vehicle.
Here is the specific citation:
HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY
LAW ENFORCEMENT OPERATIONS
l October 22, 2015 Policy Number 4.62 TRAFFIC STOPS
. . .
B. Approach and Contact for Traffic Stops
1. When approaching the motor vehicle, officers should approach with caution and position themselves in a safe location to communicate effectively with the operator and still view any other occupants in the motor vehicle. This could include the passenger’s side of the vehicle. Officers should be aware that any traffic stop may escalate into a high-risk traffic stop at any time.
2. Officers shall take reasonable measures to avoid placing themselves in the path or potential path of a motor vehicle.
The use of firearms is also addressed in
HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY
LAW ENFORCEMENT ROLE, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND RELATIONSHIPS
April 24, 2015 Policy Number 1.041
USE OF FORCE
IX. DEADLY FORCE AND FIREARMS
…
B. Handling of Firearms
All personnel shall take reasonable safety precautions when handling any firearm.
1. A firearm shall not be drawn, displayed, fired unnecessarily, or used as an unlawful threat or
warning.
2. A firearm shall not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless the operator and/or occupant(s)
of the vehicle pose an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury and/or are attempting
to use deadly force against the officer or other(s).
3. Officers shall take reasonable measures to avoid placing themselves in the path or potential path
of a suspect vehicle.
. . .
It should be noted that the HPD policies on Use of Force are under review and may be revised.
So, it looks like there is a policy to avoid shooting at moving cars and standing in front of them.
Yet, with SHOPO’s strong support HPD Patrolmen ignore the policy continue to kill people.
If the public would come forward when incidents like this happen then maybe the cops would think twice about shooting
Has anyone read the outcome of how the victim really died? It was a gun shot to his head. Nobody seems to want to come forward and report what they know really happened. The cops wanted him dead. They didn’t shoot because they felt like there lives was in danger. Those cops should be charged with murder. And the witness should come forward and make a statement about what they know really happened. I bet cops would think twice about being trigger happy.