Witnesses yell 'he can't hear you' as cops shoot deaf man

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press


Ken Miller, Associated Press
 Updated 3:12 pm, Wednesday, September 20, 2017



OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Oklahoma City police officers who opened fire on a man in front of his home as he approached them holding a metal pipe didn't hear witnesses yelling that he was deaf, a department official said Wednesday.

Magdiel Sanchez, 35, wasn't obeying the officers' commands before one shot him with a gun and the other with a Taser on Tuesday night, police Capt. Bo Mathews said at a news conference. He said witnesses were yelling "he can't hear you" before the officers fired, but they didn't hear them.
 
"In those situations, very volatile situations, you have a weapon out, you can get what they call tunnel vision, or you can really lock in to just the person that has the weapon that'd be the threat against you," Mathews said. "I don't know exactly what the officers were thinking at that point."
 
Sanchez, who had no apparent criminal history, died at the scene. The officer who fired the gun, Sgt. Chris Barnes, has been placed on administrative leave pending an investigation.

Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Police-Man-holding-stick-shot-by-officer-in-12213721.php

[Honeycombe8]

1. Aw, geez. Why were the police called to that location? nt

[Stuart G]

2. Awful beyond words...k and r...nt

[Roy Rolling]

3. All these shootings

If all of these killings were in self-defense, why are there no life-threatening injuries on these police people? Where are their injuries to prove the threat on their lives?

[atreides1]

6. It's called, fear!

They're afraid, so they use deadly force, because it's what they are trained to do! The standard excuse is they were in fear of their lives, and rulings by the US Supreme Court only makes it easier for an officer to shoot someone and not face any consequences!

Most of those rulings paint with a very broad brush, by allowing the officer to decide what is reasonable force!

Let's face it, a jury will take the word of a cop over the word of anyone else, and when the victim is a person of color, they more often them not are the ones put on trial...and that's assuming the prosecutor can convince a grand jury to indict!

More often then not, prosecutor's aren't trying real hard to get a conviction, and will present a case that a group of 5 year olds wouldn't believe...but because it's a cop, the fix is already in!

As long as police are held to the low standards allowed by US Supreme Court decisions, this will play out over and over again!!!

[rurallib]

4. God that is horrible

poor fellow probably never had a clue why they shot him. Horrible.

[Old Vet]

8. Serious, You run at a cop with a metal pipe and dont understand what might happen. Right

[MindPilot]

12. The article says the piece of pipe was actually a walking stick.

And there is nothing in the article that indicates he was running.

[rurallib]

16. the article says "approached" not "run at" and a "metal pipe"

can be a lot of things but unless it has some firing mechanism it can probably be ducked when thrown.

So I am trying to look at this from what the last things that happened before he was shot dead. He can't hear anything so is confused about what is going on. He approaches the police carrying something - a cane maybe? or perhaps a pipe as self-defense - and blamo - end of life.

[Old Vet]

23. This is a tough call, To many un-knowns,If he approached at a calm walk thats different...

But did the cop draw his weapon and did this poor fella see this? Iam waiting to see if there were any witnesses, I would be VERY interested in that.

[Luciferous]

37. Clearly there were witnesses who were yelling at the cops that the man

couldn't hear them.

[Eliot Rosewater]

5. Jim JEfferies did bit last night on the difference between UK and

here because they dont allow guns there.

We will keep killing each other until we get rid of them, until we grow up.

Maturity would be to recognize the bad of guns far outweighs the good and do something.

[MindPilot]

10. Controlling cop's access to guns would be an excellent first step.

Like in the UK, when a situation does require the threat of lethal force, a specially-trained constable is called.

[Old Vet]

7. If he was running toward a cop with a metal pipe, Other then run away not sure what I would..

Of done. Iam gonna wait for more information, If the cop didn't have time to deploy a taser. In reality there were only two options for the cop, Run away from this dude or shoot. What a fucked up situation, Ive watched fights with bats and man a person can get hurt bad fast. Of course some will say the cop was wrong whatever the situation but maybe, just maybe this dude should NOT of attacked a cop.

[MindPilot]

14. "attacked a cop"

From the article Mr Sanchez appears to have done nothing more than arise from his chair on the front porch to approach a cop who came onto his property. He probably picked up his walking stick out of habit.

How do you turn that into "attacking a cop"?

[Old Vet]

25. I stand to be corrected sir, Yes ive read two articles and two different versions..........

One article suggests the same as you say, And another where he was walking toward the cop and did not stop when ordered which brings his hearing front and center. BUT did he see the cop with his weapon pulled?

[uncle ray]

27. you sure are trying hard to blame the dead man while you "wait for more info". n/t

[raven mad]

9. Oh, holy crap................ oh, my god...........

This is UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE. Yo, Capt. Bo? You, sir, and your department are a DISGRACE. There is no excuse, NONE, for this. NONE.

I'm almost beyond outrage at this point. How the FUCK are we supposed to deal with cops anymore? I mean, NO ONE is safe.

[MindPilot]

17. how to deal with cops?

Well, if you listen to the badge-sniffers who show up in almost every thread with this kind of subject matter, all these problems would be eliminated if we the people would just kowtow properly to our oppressors.

[raven mad]

19. MindPilot, I haven't had many dealings with any police forces outside of up here.

Those encounters were benign; usually at parades, concerts, etc. They're pretty much okay, not much power play, etc.

But this systemic racism, arrogance, and "I can get away with it" attitudes? I'm glad I'm where I am. I do NOT understand it, especially after so many are getting caught.

[rockfordfile]

11. Is it true that he was deaf? If so then it's murder. The cops could have taken a different approach

[matt819]

13. I have an idea

It appears that when cops kill people, they get paid vacation, otherwise known as administrative leave.

I’d like to suggest an alternative. Cops who kill people should be placed on unpaid mandatory leave for six months after a shooting.

Sure, there are those who will argue that the prospect of not being paid for six months might have a bearing on how a cop might respond to a potentially dangerous situation. Fair point. But it also might prevent shootings such as these, and other apparent murders committed by police officers.

Another recommendation would be that police departments commit to not hiring cops who have been fired or resigned from jobs in which they committed murder and brutality.

In any case, the situation we have now is untenable. It’s time for some new thinking, new training, new hiring practices, etc.

[DeminPennswoods]

15. Interesting stuff

I think prospective police officers should take a battery of psychological tests before being admitted to a police academy class. I think they should be randomly re-tested as well to assess any changes from their original baseline testing.

[MindPilot]

18. My idea: Allow the same "feared for my life" standard to apply to citizens as well.

"Well, yer honur, the officer approached me in my driveway. He was very angry and agitated, shouting at me. I could plainly see the safety was off on his sidearm, and he was openly threatening me with a taser. I felt I was in imminent danger and feared for my life, so I shot him."

[raven mad]

20. Oh, and whatever you do? Don't peacefully protest.

Lawmakers in North Dakota, North Carolina, Florida, Tennessee and Texas proposed bills that would make it legal for drivers to hit protesters if the driver did not do so willfully, according to Mick Bullock, a spokesman for the National Conference of State Legislatures.

A similar bill also was introduced in Rhode Island, according to the state General Assembly's website.

The language in these bills is remarkably similar from state to state, and in some cases, nearly identical.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/legislation-protects-drivers-injure-protesters/index.html

[not fooled]

28. The language in these bills is similar

probably because they were handed ready to go to puke legislators in all those states simultaneously. Undoubtedly courtesy of bill mill the American Legislative Exchange Council, another arm of the shadow government established by the koch brothers and their ilk.

[Beartracks]

31. Unwillfully hitting a pedestrian is something drivers are LEGALLY bound to avoid.

AFAIK, even if a pedestrian is crossing outside of an official crosswalk, standing beside a stalled vehicle, standing in the middle of the road, or whatever, a driver is legally bound to be watchful and aware of ALL objects in their immediate vicinity, whether moving or not, and to ANTICIPATE problems, and then DRIVE SAFELY as dictated by the surroundings.

Making a "special class" of pedestrian that is "more okay" to hit with a car than a "regular" pedestrian really runs afoul of the responsibilities of driving.

It's like: "Hey, drivers, it is YOUR awesome responsibility to be safe with the tons of metal and plastic under your control, but you can be a bit less vigilant -- so long as you're not wantonly careless, ha ha! -- when driving around crowds of protestors!! Remember, some protestors bring their kids with them, too, so BONUS POINTS if you unwillfully just happen to run over one (Ha ha! Of COURSE I'm kidding! Ha ha!)"

In any case, how's a prosecutor supposed to prove a driver hit protestors willfully?? Oh, yeah, you can't prove it "beyond a shadow of a doubt" so woo hoo for the dumbshit driver getting off scot free every time!!

(Where's the "dumb laws" smilie?)

===================

[Doreen]

21. Bull fucking shit!! They HEARD they just fucking did not LISTEN!!

[BumRushDaShow]

22. "you can really lock in to just the person that has the weapon"

That only applies when the person is not white.

[NutmegYankee]

24. This article is BULLSHIT.

It says the man wasn't obeying the officers commands. No commands were given to the man - if he's deaf there is no such thing as sound. All he saw was animated faces. It's like me giving you a command by telepathy and then shooting you when you don't comply.

[CousinIT]

26. Seems cops don't understand disabilities, autism, etc.

They need better training or something ie: INVESTIGATE THE ACTUAL SITUATION BEFORE SHOOTING SOMEONE.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/19/opinion/police-autism-understanding.html?smid=tw-share

[heaven05]

29. sure are

a bunch of cowardly cops supposedly 'protecting and serving' but only themselves andno one else in their cases.

[Bayard]

30. Jesus Pete on a pony!

Cops all over the country need training on de-escalating a situation. In instances like this, it never sounds like the cop is calm whatsoever. How are their assessment skills then? They always have their thumbs on the trigger. Why were they even in this guy's yard? Sounds like plain old assault with intent to kill.

When I still lived in CA, I got beat up by a Fresno County Sheriff's deputy. He came to my house on my property, and thru two gates. Followed me into my house demanding to see my driver's license. Granted, this was connected to a long term property dispute with my evil neighbors, but the cops had already decided way back that I was just a mouthy bitch that needed some discipline. So this deputy, alone in my house with me, decides he's going to arrest me because I had been out mowing my grass in my fenced yard, and had to aim around the neighbors, who wouldn't leave. I had called the cops, and went back to mowing grass. They claimed I tried to hit them. I couldn't find my license fast enough, so he grabs my arm, wrenches it around behind my back, and jerks upward before slapping on the cuffs. I was literally screaming in pain. Old broken shoulder, arm, wrist, on that side from various horse injuries. Caused permanent nerve damage to my shoulder, because it already has no mobility.

If you made it to the end of that shortened story, I'll tell you I tried to file a lawsuit. My attorney, that I didn't know was a reserve deputy, agreed to dismiss any filing, if they would dismiss any charges, unbeknownst to me. This whole neighbor/cop thing went on for 8 years. This is just one little highlight. The point is, I think cops make up their mind about you in about the first 30 seconds, and if they decide you're no good, you're toast. If you try to argue with them, you're going to get jelly on that toast.

[Duppers]

32. Omg! That's terrible.

Typical Authoritarian Types! Totally prejudice and in cahoots with each other.

So sorry this happened to you. What a horrible situation!!

[Duppers]

33. K & R

[onecaliberal]

34. Geezuz Christ

[bucolic_frolic]

35. I simply do not understand

how competent professionals trained in physical confrontation feel unable to disarm someone armed with a pipe without shooting him to death

[Locrian]

36. training

They're being trained to be in "fire fights" and on reaction speed to "threats". Not to "protect and serve" - or even be smart about situations.

https://www.policeone.com/police-training/articles/125455-competition-and-training-how-to-train-how-not-to-train/

Unfortunately, to our eyes, IDPA is starting to follow that same route. IDPA courses of fire, among other sins, often require very poor use of cover, require tactical reloads (about which there is nothing tactical at all), mandate movement into an unsafe area, and require that you shoot fast! All of these things could be seriously bad on the street.

This is not the fault of the people involved in IDPA or IPSC. Those are universally fine people who just want to sustain an interesting, growing, exciting, fun shooting sport.

The problem is this: any shooting event can be judged objectively only by two criteria: accuracy and speed. Tactical correctness cannot be scored as it is always a subjective judgment. And shooting fast is quite often not the tactically right thing to do - often it's to hunker down behind cover and observe, wait or communicate. You can't judge that objectively, either.

[Blue_Tires]

38. And there will be another one next week in some other city

shit never changes...