• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NYPD Kills 2 [Senseless War on Drugs]

Status
Not open for further replies.

YoungHav

Banned
Commissioner Kelly Voices Concern on Fatal Bronx Shooting

A police officer who shot and killed an unarmed 18-year-old in the bathroom of the teenager’s Bronx apartment has been stripped of his gun and badge, the police commissioner said Friday, and both the commissioner and the mayor expressed concern about the circumstances of the shooting.

The commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, stopped short of declaring the shooting unjustified but said at a news conference: “At this juncture, we see an unarmed person being shot. That always concerns us.”

The fatal shot came shortly after 3 p.m. Thursday. Members of the Street Narcotics Enforcement Unit, who had pursued Mr. Graham based on a report that he was armed, broke open the door to the second-floor apartment where he lived with his family on East 229th Street, Mr. Kelly said.

As the first officer came through, Mr. Graham emerged from the back of the apartment running toward them, then veered into the bathroom, the police said.

“Show me your hands! Show me your hands!” the officer yelled, said Mr. Kelly, who cited the account of a second officer who trailed the first officer into the apartment. The police did not release the names of any of the officers. Mr. Graham was black; the officer who shot him is white.

Inside the apartment, Mr. Kelly said, the first officer, who was in the hallway outside the bathroom, yelled, “Gun! Gun!” suggesting to the officers behind him that Mr. Graham was armed.

“The partner said he then heard a shot,” Mr. Kelly said. “It is at that point we believe the shooting officer fired once from his 9-millimeter service firearm.”

The bullet hit Mr. Graham in the upper chest, striking a lung and his aorta, killing him, said Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for the medical examiner.

Mr. Kelly added that investigators had yet to find evidence that Mr. Graham was armed. “No gun was recovered,” the commissioner said. Rather, the police said, a bag of marijuana was found in the toilet, raising the possibility that Mr. Graham bolted to the bathroom to try to dispose of it.


The scene outside Mr. Graham’s home on Friday was tense at times. As the police re-entered the three-family house to execute a search warrant, one bystander on the street yelled, “You killed him because he smoked weed!” Later, dozens of people began shouting toward the officers inside. “Murderers!” many yelled.

Mr. Kelly, recounting Thursday’s events, said the narcotics team had been staking out a bodega at East 228th Street and White Plains Road, after the police had received reports of drug sales out front.

With two friends, Mr. Graham went into the bodega. But they left quickly, and as they did, team members who were observing the bodega radioed their colleagues that they believed one of the three — who they later learned was Mr. Graham — “was armed,” Mr. Kelly said.

The impression that Mr. Graham had a gun was reinforced as officers tracked the three men. The group next went to a home at 728 East 229th Street, where Mr. Graham was spotted leaving with what appeared to be the butt of a gun in his waistband, according to another set of radio transmissions among the narcotics team members.

Two officers wearing raid jackets and bullet-resistant vests emerged from a van and yelled, “Police! Stop! Don’t move!” said Mr. Kelly, citing the account of a civilian witness.

But Mr. Graham made it to his home at 749 East 229th Street, and the front door locked, stymieing officers who were pursuing him with their guns drawn. Another tenant, Gene Davis, 60, said he saw the officers rushing through the outside gate before they reached the door. They yelled at him: “Don’t move! Get back!”

Eventually, a man alerted by the commotion let the sergeant in a back door and told him that Mr. Graham lived on the second floor. The officers then spread out: One stayed on the ground floor; the sergeant stayed on the stairs; and two lead officers went to the apartment and knocked. When no one answered, they “broke open” the door, Mr. Kelly said.

Precisely what happened in the bathroom seconds later is not clear. On Thursday night, the police said Mr. Graham had tussled with an officer, but on Friday, Mr. Kelly said there did not appear to be any evidence of a struggle.

“We don’t believe there was contact,” he said.

The officer yelled, “Gun! Gun!” and then fired, Mr. Kelly said.


The teenager’s grandmother Patricia Hartley was in the hallway. Paulet Minzie, the landlady, who lives on the third floor, said she heard the grandmother shouting at the police: “Why you hitting me? Why you hitting me?”

Mr. Graham’s 6-year-old brother was also screaming, Ms. Minzie said. “He said, ‘They killed my brother!’ ” she related.

Responding to Home Invasion, Police Kill Resident Who Was Holding A Gun

Dale Ogarro had been grabbed by two armed men wearing hoods, masks and latex gloves and led — gun to his head — into his residence in the basement of the home, on Schenck Avenue.

“Where’s the money?” they shouted at Mr. Ogarro, according to officials’ account of his girlfriend's 911 calls.

Moments later, the officers saw a man who they later learned was Mr. Ogarro, 41, emerging from the back entrance with his hands up. He said there was not a problem.

It was not. In the next moments, a second man came out that door, carrying a loaded .38-caliber revolver and refusing an officer’s orders to freeze, the authorities said.

The man made some kind of move, the police said, and an officer, 30, fired a single bullet that tore through the man’s chest, killing him.

What was learned thereafter was that uniformed officers had not shot a robber, but another resident of the home, Duane Browne, 26, about 14 minutes after the first 911 call.


The police said Mr. Browne was the half-brother of Mr. Ogarro, the target of the robbery. The police said that while Mr. Ogarro did not tell them much about what had happened with the robbers, investigators found 11 bags of marijuana and a scale in his home....

Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman, who is not related to Duane Browne, said: “The overarching consideration that is looked at, in whether a shooting is justified or not, is whether it is reasonable for the police officer to believe that either he or somebody else present is in imminent danger of serious injury or death. And in this instance you had an individual, armed, who was not complying with a directive to stop and drop the gun.”...

The police said the robbers had emerged from an alley as Mr. Ogarro parked his Tahoe in his driveway behind his house. He was grabbed, and his girlfriend remained in the car.

Duane Browne, who was in the bedroom with Ms. Ferdinand, heard a commotion below, and when he checked the noise, saw Mr. Ogarro with two men and returned upstairs, the police said. He told his girlfriend, “They’re messing with my brother,” Mr. Kelly said, and he retrieved a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson.

As officers arrived, Mr. Ogarro’s captors told him to show them a way out of the house and he led them through the front door to avoid the police. Mr. Ogarro then exited from the rear, and officers handcuffed him.

When Mr. Browne came outside with the gun in his hand, about 10:50 p.m., an officer, with his gun raised, said, “Police, don’t move,” officials said, citing what his partner recounted. Mr. Ogarro said he heard an officer yell, “Freeze, freeze, freeze, he’s got a revolver,” but the police said they have a recorded transmission in which a man they believe is the officer who opened fire yelled, “He’s got a gun.” Mr. Ogarro’s girlfriend told the police that she heard the police officer shout, “Freeze, freeze, drop the weapon,” the police said.

Mr. Browne was taken to Brookdale University Hospital and Medical Center, where he was pronounced dead, Mr. Kelly said.

The police said the gun recovered at the scene was illegal and was not registered to Mr. Browne. It was loaded with five bullets, and a round was discovered on the ground.

In April 2005, Mr. Ogarro was wounded by gunfire in a former residence in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn, the police said, in a dispute over a sale of two pounds of marijuana. He was also present a month later when a drug dealer carried out a killing, the police said.
 

Jenga

Banned
former incident = tragedy, direct fault of idiot officer and drug policies
latter incident = don't hold a gun when confronting the cops


and the latter incident has nothing to do with drugs?
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
former incident = tragedy, direct fault of idiot officer and drug policies
Yup
latter incident = don't hold on a gun when confronting the cops

And yup

Although the second one may not have been that clear cut. Their description of it wasn't detailed enough for me to be comfortable saying the guy had enough warning to drop his weapon and freeze.
 

Blackface

Banned
Why did they need to mention this?

Welcome to the media. When a white person kills/beats up a black man the races are brought up. When a black man or a group of black people kill a white person or beat up white people, races are never mentioned.

Either always mention the race or never mention the race. Picking and choosing is a joke.
 

Jenga

Banned
I get the impression Hav grouped em up together to make them both look like incidents directly related to drugs as well as both incidents where the NYPD are entirely at fault....
when in reality, they're both very separate incidents probably worthy of separate threads.


how very disingenuous, but not surprising coming from OP
 
Mannnnnnn, the NYPD needs to raise their standers on being an officer in the City. Ever since they lower their requirements in the late 90's and early 2000's; A lot of this bad judgement calls has been happening ever since. I knew the NYPD is bullshit when they hire my knuckle head neighbor...
 

Blackface

Banned
Mannnnnnn, the NYPD needs to raise their standers on being an officer in the City. Ever since they lower their requirements in the late 90's and early 2000's; A lot of this bad judgement calls has been happening ever since. I knew the NYPD is bullshit when they hire my knuckle head neighbor...

When they "lowered" their standards, the crime started to go away. NYPD officers in the late 60's/70's/early 80's, were some of the most corrupt police ever. Leading to the largest corruption bust in law enforcement history. The 80's and 70's in New york was also a warzone.

Not until these early 90's really late 80's cops came into power did a majority of the crime start to go away.

Also in the 70's/80's, the NYPD would beat the living fuck out of people on a DAILY basis. Many of them have spoken candidly about this. They would take bribes, run protection rackets and worked almost like a mob. This is the known history of the NYPD.

The NYPD now, are great at what they do, and NY has NEVER been safer.
 
I wonder if they'll release that audio recording from the second incident. What the fuck was the guy thinking walking at them with a gun in his hand? That first one though, that sounds like some weird shit went down. The grandmother being heard screaming "why are you hitting me" is pretty fucking weird and makes you think there was some shady shit going down in that house on the cops ends.
 
Welcome to the media. When a white person kills/beats up a black man the races are brought up. When a black man or a group of black people kill a white person or beat up white people, races are never mentioned.


You are right. Instead of mentioning race, they post a picture of the black person,video of the incident or a link to a website that specializes in racism towards blacks.
 

Zaptruder

Banned
Welcome to the media. When a white person kills/beats up a black man the races are brought up. When a black man or a group of black people kill a white person or beat up white people, races are never mentioned.

Either always mention the race or never mention the race. Picking and choosing is a joke.

So... how do you know they're black people harming/killing white people if the races aren't mentioned?
 

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
Welcome to the media. When a white person kills/beats up a black man the races are brought up. When a black man or a group of black people kill a white person or beat up white people, races are never mentioned.

Either always mention the race or never mention the race. Picking and choosing is a joke.
Uh, does the Jena 6 ring a bell?
 

Htown

STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
Welcome to the media. When a white person kills/beats up a black man the races are brought up. When a black man or a group of black people kill a white person or beat up white people, races are never mentioned.

Nonsense.
 
When they "lowered" their standards, the crime started to go away. NYPD officers in the late 60's/70's/early 80's, were some of the most corrupt police ever. Leading to the largest corruption bust in law enforcement history. The 80's and 70's in New york was also a warzone.

Not until these early 90's really late 80's cops came into power did a majority of the crime start to go away.

Also in the 70's/80's, the NYPD would beat the living fuck out of people on a DAILY basis. Many of them have spoken candidly about this. They would take bribes, run protection rackets and worked almost like a mob. This is the known history of the NYPD.

The NYPD now, are great at what they do, and NY has NEVER been safer.

I say technology made it safer, not the NYPD. Shit load of camera's everywhere, unlike the the previous decade. And two, they have a lot of bodies on the street, so people are less incline to do something. Doesn't mean the NYPD is doing something right. They need better training then that 6 month course. 6 months is not enough time to be a cop. Some of this guys don't even make make it pass their first month in the NYPD. They can't even handle sitting on a body.
 

Razorwind

Member
I say technology made it safer, not the NYPD. Shit load of camera's everywhere, unlike the the previous decade. And two, they have a lot of bodies on the street, so people are less incline to do something. Doesn't mean the NYPD is doing something right. They need better training then that 6 month course. 6 months is not enough time to be a cop. Some of this guys don't even make make it pass their first month in the NYPD. They can't even handle sitting on a body.

6 months is all it takes????
 

KevinRo

Member
6 months is all it takes????

Do you know how long bootcamp for the armed forces is?

6 months is not 'ALL IT TAKES'. They're continually monitored and tested thereafter. Not only that, they're not given a gun or a car after 6 months. 6 months is just the academy.

*edit*

Actually, I'm wrong. The academy, they test them with police issued guns. But 6 months includes, I'm guessing physical testing, mental testing, and the academy included. Then again, that's more than enough time for basic training.
 

tokkun

Member
I suggest you read the Supreme Court's decision in Tennessee v. Garner.

I don't think anyone is arguing that the man deserved to be shot for running. However, if he hadn't run, it seems unlikely that he would have been shot in error. You don't want to put a police officer with a drawn weapon in a situation where their adrenaline is pumping and they have to make a quick decision, or they are more likely to make a mistake. Even if the officer were to end up being prosecuted for the shooting, that will not do you much good if you're dead.
 

siddx

Magnificent Eager Mighty Brilliantly Erect Registereduser
First one is a terrible shame, the second one is the idiots own fault.

Still, I'm glad to know in the first case the officer was stripped of his gun and badge. I've lived in too many countries where the officer wouldn't have had anything done to him at all.
 
Welcome to the media. When a white person kills/beats up a black man the races are brought up. When a black man or a group of black people kill a white person or beat up white people, races are never mentioned.

Either always mention the race or never mention the race. Picking and choosing is a joke.

That's bullshit and you know it. fucking lol.
 

Sanjuro

Member
I don't think anyone is arguing that the man deserved to be shot for running. However, if he hadn't run, it seems unlikely that he would have been shot in error. You don't want to put a police officer with a drawn weapon in a situation where their adrenaline is pumping and they have to make a quick decision, or they are more likely to make a mistake. Even if the officer were to end up being prosecuted for the shooting, that will not do you much good if you're dead.

That's the point. I didn't bring up any of the legality issues. If a person's natural instinct is to not comply and run away from the police, I would tell you their life expectancy would be much lower than the alternative. It's just common sense.
 

J.ceaz

Member
Read this in the paper yesterday. Apparently the unarmed guy had 2 prior drug arrests. I'm sure he ran because he didn't want to go to jail for a bag of weed (which makes sense). Those of you saying he shouldn't have ran are pointing out a useless fact of the case. There are hundreds of kids who run from cops every day in America. For serious crimes, lesser crimes and even for misdemeanors. An Unarmed person shouldn't get shot especially if "there doesn't appear to be a struggle."Kid was 18.
 

Sanjuro

Member
Read this in the paper yesterday. Apparently the unarmed guy had 2 prior drug arrests. I'm sure he ran because he didn't want to go to jail for a bag of weed (which makes sense). Those of you saying he shouldn't have ran are pointing out a useless fact of the case. There are hundreds of kids who run from cops every day in America. For serious crimes, lesser crimes and even for misdemeanors. An Unarmed person shouldn't get shot especially if "there doesn't appear to be a struggle."Kid was 18.
Useless fact? The land of make believe must be a wonderful place.
 
Agree with the consensus, first one the cop is trigger happy, the second case the cops were protecting themselves and the victim. Think about it, the police arrive in response to reported armed robbery, and some guy comes running out of the house behind the victim waving a gun around?
 

Angry Fork

Member
former incident = tragedy, direct fault of idiot officer and drug policies
latter incident = don't hold a gun when confronting the cops


and the latter incident has nothing to do with drugs?

It can be argued that if cops are in your house you shouldn't have to obey them by putting the gun down. I personally wouldn't do this since I know it's a bad idea but I don't like the idea of police being able to come into my house and if I want to defend myself I can't, just because they're police doesn't mean I shouldn't treat them the same as anyone else.

Agree with the consensus, first one the cop is trigger happy, the second case the cops were protecting themselves and the victim. Think about it, the police arrive in response to reported armed robbery, and some guy comes running out of the house behind the victim waving a gun around?

This is true but that's why I feel like police should have the ability to shoot someone in the leg or arm if they can. Right now I believe the policy is shoot to kill always, if you open fire it's to kill or at least shoot in spots where they're more likely to die. That's just really over the top, if you can commit an alternative that's what should happen. Then you never know if cops will lie about the situation for the sake of covering their own asses but that's another debate entirely.
 

J.ceaz

Member
Useless fact? The land of make believe must be a wonderful place.

It is a useless fact. It has nothing to do with the end result. The cop didn't shoot this guy while he was running nor did he shoot him "during a struggle". If anything you're in the land of make believe where "He shouldn't have ran" Is an adequate response to this.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
"...stripped of his gun and badge" and it seems he's entirely at fault. Ugh.
 

Angry Fork

Member
This only happens in movies. If you fire a live weapon you're shooting to kill.

Which is what I said I disagreed with. There have been too many cases where someone was unarmed or didn't post a threat but was killed because of this policy. Shoot them in the leg, they fall down, everyone rushes and then you can find out what the real story is. Shooting to kill should only be done if someone has a gun and is rushing towards you, aiming at you, etc. things like that.
 

J.ceaz

Member
"...stripped of his gun and badge" and it seems he's entirely at fault. Ugh.

An unarmed man was shot and killed in his home for trying to flush a bag of weed.
(I don't understand what you were trying to get across with your post but this needed to be reiterated anyway)
 

Sanjuro

Member
It is a useless fact. It has nothing to do with the end result. The cop didn't shoot this guy while he was running nor did he shoot him "during a struggle". If anything you're in the land of make believe where "He shouldn't have ran" Is an adequate response to this.

So, what you're telling me is the fact he ran away from the officer instead of complying had little or nothing to do with the officer's decision to draw his gun on the suspect?
 
Which is what I said I disagreed with. There have been too many cases where someone was unarmed or didn't post a threat but was killed because of this policy. Shoot them in the leg, they fall down, everyone rushes and then you can find out what the real story is. Shooting to kill should only be done if someone has a gun and is rushing towards you, aiming at you, etc. things like that.

There's no room for opinion here, shooting someone in the arm only happens in movies because it's impractical and a terrible breach of fundamental gun etiquette; you never point a gun unless you're prepared to kill what's on the other end. Think about the implications if a fucking gun were considered an appropriate method for police to try to exercise nonlethal force. Your proposal would kill far more people than you would save.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
An unarmed man was shot and killed in his home for trying to flush a bag of weed.
(I don't understand what you were trying to get across with your post but this needed to be reiterated anyway)

I'm expressing disgust that, apparently, a man was needlessly and unjustifiably killed, and yet it's not deemed a crime but rather a misapplication of professional conduct.
 

Angry Fork

Member
There's no room for opinion here, shooting someone in the arm only happens in movies because it's impractical and a terrible breach of fundamental gun etiquette; you never point a gun unless you're prepared to kill what's on the other end. Think about the implications if a fucking gun were considered an appropriate method for police to try to exercise nonlethal force. Your proposal would kill far more people than you would save.

Maybe, but all I know is I don't trust the racist crackpots in the NYPD to decide when to take a life when many of them are on power trips and have itchy trigger fingers.
 

J.ceaz

Member
So, what you're telling me is the fact he ran away from the officer instead of complying had little or nothing to do with the officer's decision to draw his gun on the suspect?

No what I'm saying is that In a world where people are likely to run from the cops if they're trying to avoid jail time the act of running itself SHOULD NOT factor into drawing your weapon. And it just so happens that those are the rules of the police department. you only draw your weapon when you or someone else is in danger. And before you ask no fleeing does not constitute danger.
 

the chris

Member
Which is what I said I disagreed with. There have been too many cases where someone was unarmed or didn't post a threat but was killed because of this policy. Shoot them in the leg, they fall down, everyone rushes and then you can find out what the real story is. Shooting to kill should only be done if someone has a gun and is rushing towards you, aiming at you, etc. things like that.
A shot to the leg isn't guaranteed to take someone down, plus the leg is a much smaller target. Officers are trained to shoot in the chest because it is a larger target and you are more likely to neutralize the threat one way or another.
 

Sanjuro

Member
No what I'm saying is that In a world where people are likely to run from the cops if they're trying to avoid jail time the act of running itself SHOULD NOT factor into drawing your weapon. And it just so happens that those are the rules of the police department. you only draw your weapon when you or someone else is in danger. And before you ask no fleeing does not constitute danger.

That is not the question. The question is do you believe the suspect's actions factored into the final outcome of this situation? What you believe "SHOULD NOT" be a factor isn't relevant to that question.
 

Angry Fork

Member
But you would trust them to shoot anyone they feel like disarming or disabling?

No, but I'm not sure all police should have guns to begin with. It might be necessary right now but in the future the country can be fine without it. Many other '1st world' technologically advanced countries work fine without all police having guns, with less crime than we have and are only given to sections like SWAT or other tactical groups.
 

J.ceaz

Member
That is not the question. The question is do you believe the suspect's actions factored into the final outcome of this situation? What you believe "SHOULD NOT" be a factor isn't relevant to that question.

What I believe should not be a factor is wholly relevant to the incident. Whether or not the kid running factored into the officers decision doesn't matter at all because either way it was the wrong decision. Running alone should never get you shot and killed ever, and the NYPD agrees. Basically I disagree with the premise of your question
 

Sanjuro

Member
What I believe should not be a factor is wholly relevant to the incident. Whether or not the kid running factored into the officers decision doesn't matter at all because either way it was the wrong decision. Running alone should never get you shot and killed ever, and the NYPD agrees. Basically I disagree with the premise of your question

...but it did get him killed. You personal choice not to answer the question does not change the outcome of this situation. That's why you sound a bit silly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom