Tag Archives: police shooting

After Officer Mohammed Noor Shot Justine Damond Minneapolis Police Got A Search Warrant For Her House

Justine Damond Officer Mohamed Noor Minneapolis Police

For some inexplicable reason Minneapolis Police Officer Mohamed Noor “feared for his life” when him and his partner, Officer Matthew Harrity were approached by an unarmed 40 year old woman wearing pajamas. The Minneapolis Police Department’s equally ridiculous response to Noor shooting Justine Damond, whose “crime” was calling the police to report a potential sexual assault, was to go out and get a search warrant for Damond’s house.

According to a description of the search warrant posted at KSTP.com, the intent seems to have been to find evidence of drug usage or some sort of written statements by Damond:

Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension investigators were granted permission to search Justine Damond’s home hours after she was shot and killed by a Minneapolis police officer, according to court records.

A criminal law expert can’t understand why.

“I don’t understand why they’re looking for bodily fluids inside her home,” said Joseph Daly, an emeritus professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, referring to one of two recently-released search warrant applications.

“Whose bodily fluids are they looking for? Is she a suspect? I don’t understand why they’re looking for controlled substances inside her home. I don’t understand why they’re looking for writings inside her home. The warrant does not explain that to me.”

“When I read that search warrant, I really cannot find probable cause to search her home,” he continued.

According to court documents, investigators applied for the warrant on the following grounds:

  • The property or things above-described was used as a means of committing a crime
  • The possession of the property or things above-described constitutes a crime.
  • The property or things above-described is in the possession of a person with intent to use such property as a means of committing a crime, or the property or things so intended to be used are in the possession of another to whom they have been delivered for the purpose of concealing them or preventing their being discovered.
  • The property or things above-described constitutes evidence which tends to show a crime has been committed, or tends to show that a particular person has committed a crime.

Asked if that means the BCA considers Damond to be a suspect, spokesperson Jill Oliveira replied via email:

“No, an individual involved in the incident.”

Daly, who said he has served as a visiting professor at the University of Queensland in Damond’s native Australia, believes concerned members of the public in both countries will be outraged by the BCA’s request to search the home.

Instead of investigating Noor’s deadly actions, the first reaction to a completely unjustifiable murder by a police officer against an innocent woman was to go and file for a search warrant for her house. The focus of that search on the victim rather than the shooter, along with the statements about Damond being “panicked” during her 911 calls, Noor being startled by a loud noise, and the references to ambushes of police officers tells you what their true intent was in the immediate aftermath of the shooting.

They were hoping to find something to smear her name with and make it appear that she was acting irrationally or in some way that could somehow be construed as threatening. Just for good measure, they’ve also made sure to say that a cell phone was found near her body, so they can claim he thought she was holding a gun. As is common practice for police departments when one of their own kills an innocent person, they were already setting up a scenario where Damond had caused her own death.

Meanwhile, Noor reportedly feels that his Brothas in Blue have “thrown him under the bus.” According to an anonymous friend, “His colleagues are accusing him of not showing proper police conduct on Saturday night.” To be fair, cops will normally support one of their own, regardless of how heinous and obvious their crime might be. However, it’s a bit hard to argue with anyone that says that shooting an innocent, unarmed woman is proper conduct.

In another development last week, Minneapolis Police Chief Janee Harteau has been forced to resign by Mayor Betsy Hodges. It’s been a bad couple weeks in the arena of public opinion for Chief Harteau. In rapid succession, she has had another murderous cop get off after shooting Philando Castile and video surface an officer executing a family’s pet dogs.

Minneapolis Police Who Murdered Australian Woman After 911 Call Hadn’t Turned Their Body Cameras On

Minneapolis Police Shooting Australian Justine Damond Nevada Cop Block

Just before midnight on Saturday night (7/15/17), police in Minneapolis responding to a 911 call shot the woman who had made that call. Justine Damond, an Australian who was living with her fiance and his son, had called to report that she heard what sounded like someone being assaulted near her home.  Justine, who was due to be married to Don Damond next month, died as a result of the shooting.

Neither officer that responded to her call has been publicly identified yet. Currently, both of them have been placed on paid vacation while their coworkers “investigate” what happened. As of yet, no official explanation has been given for why one of the police officers decided he needed to shoot Damond.

According to a statement to the media, the officers had not turned their body cameras on and their dash cam “did not capture the incident.” No explanation for why those cameras were not turned on was provided either, although Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges has stated she intends to find that out.

Via the Guardian:

Her stepson, Zac Damond, said she had called police after hearing a noise near her house.

“Two Minneapolis police officers responded to a 911 call of a possible assault just north of the 5100 block of Washburn Avenue S just before 11.30pm Saturday,” the state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension said in a statement, according to the Star Tribune. “At one point, an officer fired their weapon, fatally striking a woman.

“The BCA’s investigation is in its early stages. More information will be available once initial interviews with incident participants and any witnesses are complete … The officers’ body cameras were not turned on at the time and the squad camera did not capture the incident. Investigators are attempting to determine whether any video of the incident exists.”

The two officers involved are on paid administrative leave.

Her stepson said Damond, 40-year-old Sydneysider, was “passionate” and his “best friend”.

“Basically my mum was shot for reasons I don’t know,” he said in a video posted on Facebook on Monday morning. (Video embedded below – editor)

“I just know she heard a sound in the alley so then she called the police and the cops showed up and she was a very passionate woman, she probably thought something bad was happening and then next thing I know they take my best friend’s life.”

Details are still lacking at the moment and this story will be updated as those details emerge. However, what this story obviously illustrates is two things that I point out often here at Nevada Cop Block. First, the police cannot be trusted not to murder someone when they show up. They won’t do it every time, but you just never know when they might. So you should avoid calling 911 unless absolutely necessary (and you should do everything you possibly can to minimize or even eliminate that as a necessity) and unless you are comfortable with the possibility that the person you called them could end up dead. In fact, you might even be the one that gets killed.

Secondly, the police cannot be trusted to film themselves, whether that be via body cameras or dash cams. People still need to film the cops any time they interact with them for whatever reason. Otherwise, there’s a decent chance that they will “forget” to term them on or that they will “malfunction.” Even when that fails, the police still have control over whether that video will be released (and plenty of excuses not to).

It shouldn’t be up to the cop who is about to murder someone to turn the camera on that would document that. It also shouldn’t be up to police departments, who have a history of covering up for cops that kill, to release them to the public when they actually exist.

**Update** Justine Damond, who was dressed in pajamas at the time, was shot by Officer Mohamed Noor. Damond was reportedly talking to Noor’s (still unnamed) partner on the driver’s side of the patrol car when Noor fired across his partner and through the window from the passenger seat.

Statement By Step Son Zac Damond

Minneapolis Rally/Protest on Sunday

Bullshit Written by Officer Noor’s Lawyer

“A Wonderful Sign of Building Trust”

Update: Officer Jeronimo Yanez the Latest Cop to Get Away With Murder After Philando Castille Verdict

Earlier this afternoon, a jury in Minnesota reached a verdict in the trial of St. Anthony Police Officer Jeromino Yanez. Yanez had been charged with second degree manslaughter after he shot Philando Castille seven times in July of 2016. At the time Yanez decided to start shooting, Castille was reaching for his ID that Yanez had asked him for seconds earlier. Presumably, Officer Yanez was afraid that he was instead reaching for a (legally registered) gun that Castille had informed him of. Castille’s girlfriend, who was also in the car along with their four year old daughter, live-streamed, via Facebook Live, his final moments and her own treatment by the police after the shooting. (Video embedded below.) Philando Castille’s “crime” consisted of having a broken taillight.

Sadly, but not at all surprisingly, the verdict that was announced was “not guilty.” The glaring reality that cases like this and those of Tulsa Police Officer Betty Shelby, who was also issued a license to murder just last month, serve as grim reminders of is that, even on the rare occasions when cops are charged with a crime after unnecessarily killing someone, it’s close to impossible for them to be convicted. Of course, even beyond the basic pre-conditioning of society of the provably false notions that the police are always right and never lie, the deck is always stacked in their favor during these show trials.

A judge controls what evidence can be presented to the jury and what will instead be excluded because it is “inflammatory” or prejudicial. Meanwhile, the onus of presenting that evidence falls to the prosecutor’s office, who work with the police on a daily basis and are dependent on maintaining good relations with them for every other case they pursue. Most trials against police officers are as much a forfeit as they are a loss.

Not only that but the bar is set incredibly low for police officers, even when they kill people that were clearly innocent. All they have to do is wear their Magic Uniform (sometimes they don’t even have to do that) and use those Magic Words, “I feared for my life.” That fear doesn’t have to be justified or even in any way rational. A cop simply has to state that they were afraid and it’s up to the prosecution to somehow prove that this heroic, fearless defender of the public was not in fact afraid for no good reason.

Plus, the media always does their part for the home team helping to glorify the heroic cop and demonizing the victim. Regardless of the circumstances or what you can see with your lying eyes on a video it’s always portrayed as a “tragic mistake” or that victim’s fault. Then they build up sympathy for the killer cops by telling you how much they have already suffered by losing their job and feeling really bad about what they did (oftentimes in spite of evidence to the contrary).

Of course, anyone else charged with a crime generally also ends ups being fired and rarely has the unwavering support of a police union to cushion that blow. yet, nobody says they should just walk free based on that “hardship.” Not to mention the deadly consequences of those officers’ actions inflicted upon those they kill and their families afterwards.

I’ve warned cops and their cult of followers in the past, and in spite of the fact I know there’s pretty much zero chance they will listen, I’ll warn them again: accountability is something you should be seeking for your own sake, as well as for the sake of common decency and there are consequences when you actively work to prevent it.

No justice, no peace” isn’t always just a catchy little slogan to be chanted.

Philadelphia Taxpayers Forced to Pay $4.4 Million to Innocent Delivery Man Undercover Cops Ambushed

Last week, the Philadelphia Police Department agreed to the largest settlement in the history of the city to pay off an innocent man that two undercover cops shot at fourteen times. In April of 2014, Philippe Holland was delivering food when Officers Mitchell Farrell and Kevin Hanvey ran at him without ever identifying themselves as police officers.

Holland, having no reason to know they were cops and seeing that one of them was holding a gun, believed he was being robbed and tried to escape in his car. In spite of it specifically being against policy to do so, Farrell and Hanvey used the excuse that they “feared for their lives” from the car being used as a weapon to open fire on Holland. As a result, Holland, who was twenty years old at the time, now suffers from a permanent seizure disorder and still has bullet fragments lodged in his brain.

In spite of witness statements that contradict the two officers’ story, the district attorney (not at all surprisingly) declined to press any charges against them. Instead, they’ve been given a paid vacation for the past two years, while the slap on the wrist they will eventually receive from the department remains “pending.”

Via Philly.com:

It is the largest settlement in a police shooting case in the city’s history, according to Philadelphia Law Department records.

Then-Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey said shortly after the shooting that Officers Mitchell Farrell and Kevin Hanvey had fired at the wrong man.

On Friday, the mayor’s office called the shooting “an unfortunate, regrettable series of events.”

“We will strive to ensure that tragedies such as this do not happen again in our city,” City Solicitor Sozi Pedro Tulante said in the statement.

Philippe Holland was delivering a cheeseburger to a house on the 5100 block of Willows Avenue in West Philadelphia on April 22, 2014, as police responded to reports of gunshots nearby.

In a deposition, he said he saw Farrell and Hanvey approaching him and thought he was about to get robbed. He slipped into his car through the passenger door, he said – and that’s when one officer shined a light into the car and Holland saw a gun in the other’s hand.

He told police that Farrell and Hanvey never identified themselves as police officers. He said that he panicked and tried to pull out of his parking spot – and that the two men opened fire on him, hitting him in the head and body.

At the time, it was against police regulations for officers to fire at a moving vehicle unless someone inside the car was threatening them or someone else with some form of deadly force other than the vehicle itself.

Hanvey and Farrell told investigators they approached Holland because they saw him walking past a Chinese restaurant on 51st Street and asked a witness on the street where the gunshots she’d heard had come from. They said the woman had pointed toward Holland and said the shots came from where he was walking.

But the woman later told police investigators she had only pointed toward the Chinese restaurant, and didn’t mention a man at all.

Hanvey and Farrell insisted that they told Holland they were police and that he drove his car toward them, making them fear for their lives.

Holland, a student at Delaware County Community College, was left with a permanent seizure disorder and has bullet fragments in his brain, according to his attorney, Tom Kline, who announced the settlement Friday.

The District Attorney’s Office declined to press charges in the case. According to police documents Kline provided to the Inquirer and the Daily News, the department’s Use of Force Review Board concluded that Farrell and Hanvey had violated department policy, though the board did not specify a punishment for that violation.

A police spokesman said that the two have been on administrative duty since the shooting, and that “discipline is still pending.”

The department could not say whether the officers will return to the street.

At least the taxpayers of Philadelphia get to pay for this “unfortunate, regrettable series of events,” while the two officers actually responsible for it have had plenty of time to sit home getting paid to think about what they did. That certainly should ensure that “tragedies such as this do not happen again” in their city.

Paradise California Cop Sentenced to Just 180 Days for Murdering Driver Will Only Serve Half That

A California cop who has already gotten a huge Policeman’s Discount by only being charged with manslaughter for what was clearly a murder (see the dash camera video embedded below) will be released after serving just half of the already ridiculous 180 day sentence he received. That means that Paradise Police Officer Patrick Feaster will serve just 90 days once “good behavior” is factored into his case.

Via KRCRtv.com, the local ABC affiliate:

Butte County Sheriff Kory Honea confirmed Monday that Feaster is entitled to earn “half-time” credit, meaning Feaster could be released from custody after serving 90 days of his 180-day jail term.

Should the former officer break jail rules or incur some sort of discipline, some of that time could be taken away as part of a disciplinary process, Honea said.

“We’re going to do everything in accordance with the law,” the sheriff said.

Feaster was sentenced Friday in Butte County Superior Court in Oroville to 180 days in jail and three years of probation following his felony conviction of involuntary manslaughter in October.

A jury found Feaster guilty of involuntary manslaughter stemming from the shooting of 26-year-old Andrew Thomas in the early morning hours of Nov. 26, 2015, in Paradise. Feaster shot Thomas in the neck as approached an overturned vehicle that Thomas had been trying to climb out of.

As has been written about several times here on the CopBlock Network by Ademo, in November Feaster was caught on video shooting a DUI suspect in the neck after he was involved in a rollover accident. Initially, Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey announced that he would not be filing any charges against Feaster, based on the obviously false claim that it was an accidental discharge. However, Officer Feaster was eventually fired and then charged with involuntary manslaughter once the man he shot, Andrew Thomas, died.

Prior to the trial, it was also revealed that Feaster had failed to even tell the other officers on the scene that he shot Thomas. Audio that was released after the original video includes them telling Thomas he hadn’t been shot, then asking him if he had been shot at the bar he was spotted leaving prior to the accident after he told them that it was Feaster who had shot him. At least eleven minutes passed before Officer Feaster finally decided to tell the other cops that he had shot Thomas (see the video with audio added embedded below).

Meanwhile, once the DA finally and reluctantly charged Feaster with manslaughter, the favorable treatment continued without interruption. Feaster was released on his own recognizance without any bail requirement. That continued even after he and his brother were arrested on a drunk and disorderly charge while he was awaiting trial and still on bail.

During the trial in which Feaster was only facing a maximum sentence of five years anyway, most of the focus was on how much the man who had cold-bloodedly committed murder had suffered as a result. During the sentencing trial after his conviction, the defense attorneys and Feaster’s family spoke about how his life had been ruined and he had lost his career as a police officer. They maintained that that was punishment enough, in spite of the fact that Officer Feaster had literally taken someone’s life and the only “justification” offered for that action was “the way Thomas tried to get out of the car” somehow being a threat to him, even though it clearly wasn’t based on the video.

Of course, it shouldn’t be shocking that a district attorney who had to be forced kicking and screaming to file any charges (and filed the least serious ones they could get away with) had no problem helping the Good Cops at the Paradise Police Department protect one of their Few Bad Apples.

Video of Shooting:

Full Video with Body Camera Audio Added:

Breaking News: Officer Jeronimo Yanez Charged with Manslaughter in Shooting of Philando Castile

Minnesota Police Officer Jeronimo Yanez has been charged with second degree manslaughter for the shooting of Philando Castile in July of this year. The shooting received a large amount of public attention because Castile’s girlfriend, Lavish “Diamond” Reynolds, posted video using Facebook Live (see below) of the immediate aftermath. Also, Castile’s clean record and the lack of any actions by him to in any rational way justify his shooting created a large public outcry towards police.

Ramsey County Attorney John Choi announced that charge, along with two felony counts of dangerous discharge of a firearm, today. In doing so, he stated, “No reasonable officer would have used deadly force under these circumstances.” Choi also stated, “it is not enough … to express subjective fear of death or great bodily harm.” That’s somewhat of a (welcome) departure from the typical acceptance of a police officer simply proclaiming that they “feared for my life” as a blanket justification for their murders.

Via the Star Tribune:

Choi said he concluded “use of deadly force by Officer Yanez was not justified.” Yanez was charged Wednesday with second-degree manslaughter and two felony counts of dangerous discharge of a firearm.

Yanez fatally shot Castile, 32, July 6 during a traffic stop in Falcon Heights in which Castile informed the officer the he had a gun in his possession. A video recorded by Castile’s girlfriend, showing him bleeding in the car while the officer held them at gunpoint, has been viewed millions of times around the world, and touched off widespread outrage and protests over several years of police killings of black men.

“To those of you may say this incident was Philando Castile’s fault, I would submit that no reasonable officer — knowing, seeing and hearing what officer Yanez did at the time — would have used deadly force under these circumstances,” Choi said. “I have given officer Yanez every benefit of the doubt on his use of deadly force, but I cannot allow the death of a motorist who was lawfully carrying a firearm under these facts and circumstances to go unaccounted for.

In an interview with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) the day after the shooting, Yanez provided information that was “inconsistent” with statements immediately following the incident, Choi said.

“Officer Yanez said that as Castile was reaching down to his right, Castile turned his shoulder, kept his left hand on the steering wheel and then canted his upper body, blocking Officer Yanez’s view of his right hand,” Choi said, recounting Yanez’s statements to the BCA. “At that point, officer Yanez articulated that he was scared for his life and that of his partner.
“Officer Yanez’s verbatim statement, included in the criminal complaint, is inconsistent with the statement he made immediately following the incident in which he stated he never saw or knew where the gun was.”

Yanez fired seven times at Castile a minute after he had stopped Castile.

“Philando Castile was not resisting or fleeing,” Choi said. “There was absolutely no criminal intent exhibited by him throughout this encounter. He was respectful and compliant based upon the instructions and orders he was given. He volunteered in good faith that he had a firearm, beyond what the law requires. He empathically stated that he wasn’t pulling it out. His movement was restricted by his own seat belt”…

Before Yanez, no officer had been charged in more than 150 police-involved deaths in Minnesota since 2000. Yanez was summoned to make his first appearance in Ramsey County District Court at 1:30 Friday.

Choi said the charges were filed following 19 weeks of investigation and a review of the dashcam footage and audio footage taken during the shooting.

During a news conference Wednesday, Choi said that Yanez and his partner, Joseph Kauser, pulled Castile over the night of July 6 because he matched the description of a robbery suspect, and noted his “wide-set nose.”

Castile immediately complied with the stop, Choi said. Dashcam video and audio captured the next “critical minute,” Choi said.

Yanez said he was aware that Castile was buckled in his seat belt. He described Castile as initially having his left arm over the steering wheel with both hands in view. Yanez and Castile exchanged greetings, and Yanez told him about a broken brake light. Yanez asked Castile to produce his driver’s license and proof of insurance. After Castile provided him with the insurance, “Castile then calmly and in a nonthreatening manner said, ‘Sir, I do have to tell you that I have a firearm on me,’ ” Choi said.

Yanez replied OK, then placed his hand on his gun, according to Choi.

Yanez said “Don’t reach for (the gun),” Choi said.

Castile responded, “I’m not pulling it out.”

Yanez screamed “Don’t pull it out,” then with his left hand reached inside the vehicle. Yanez withdrew his hand, then fired seven shots in rapid succession.

The final shot was fired at 9:06 p.m.

Castile’s final words, Choi said, were “I wasn’t reaching for it.”

“His dying words were in protest that he wasn’t reaching for his gun,” Choi said. “There simply was no objective threat posed to Officer Yanez.”

Winslow Police Officer Austin Shipley, Who Shot Native American Woman Loreal Tsingine, Has Resigned

Winslow Police Shooting Loreal Tsingine Austin Shipley

On March 27th, Winslow Police Officer Austin Shipley shot Loreal Tsingine after he and his partner responded to a shoplifting complaint in the Arizona city. Officer Shipley testified that he was “forced” to shoot Tsingine five times after she attacked him with a pair of scissors.

In April, CopBlock Network contributor Brian Sumner posted about the shooting and the many questions members of Tsingine’s Navajo tribe and other indigenous tribes, as well as other activists had about the necessity of shooting her. Also, in July, I posted the body camera video (embedded below) of the shooting, which only raised more questions when it indicated that she was only “armed” with very small medical scissors and hadn’t actually raised her arms prior to being shot.

Although, the Maricopa County Prosecutor indicated upon releasing the body cam video that they would not be charging Officer Austin Shipley with a crime in relation to Tsingine’s shooting, it has now been reported that he has “decided to resign.”

Via 12News.com, the local NBC affiliate:

Winslow police officer Austin Shipley resigned from his position Monday, according to the Winslow Police Department.

Shipley shot 27-year-old Loreal Tsingine five times near a shop in Winslow in March, killing her.

An internal affairs investigation on the shooting performed by the Mesa Police Department was concluded last week.

According to Winslow PD, the results were reviewed by the department’s interim director, Christopher Vasquez, who met with Shipley Monday.

Shipley then decided to resign.

Documents from the investigation have not yet been made public.

This obviously raises even more questions about the shooting and whether it was necessary for two police officers to shoot a small woman. Not the least of which is whether Shipley will simply go to another police department and get hired as a cop once again after the attention dies down. Although Shipley has a well documented history of complaints, including excessive force complaints, it has been shown quite clearly that the Good Cops running police departments around the country have no trouble overlooking such behavior by Bad Apples and rehiring them, regardless of previous misconduct.

Michael Slager’s Trial has Begun; Will He be Acquitted Even with Walter Scott’s Murder Caught on Film?

The trial of North Charleston, SC Police Officer Michael Slager, who was caught on video murdering Walter Scott last year, began on Monday with jury selection. That jury has now been selected and after a request for a change of venue by Slager’s defense team was rejected, opening statements were scheduled to begin later today (Thursday).

(See Videos and Links to Related Posts on the CopBlock Network Below)

The fact that the jury consists of six white men and five white women with just one black man is an early question, being that Slager is white and Scott was black. The shooting has stirred controversy over race relations and police violence against minorities since the video taken by a bystander (unbeknownst to Slager) first emerged.

Beyond that, the obvious question is whether a jury will convict Slager even with the abundance and obviousness of the evidence against him. Jurors have a well documented bias toward police based on the social engineering that tells people from the moment they are born that police are heroes and more trustworthy than everyone else, in spite of evidence to the contrary. In addition, prosecutors often “throw the game,” intentionally slanting their performance in favor of the police officers that they work with and are dependent on in order to convict regular citizens.

Regardless of that, the aforementioned solidness of the evidence against Slager makes it hard to believe that he would be able to walk in this particular case. The graphic video that was taken by a random bystander clearly shows him shooting Walter Scott in the back as he is running away from him and posing no danger whatsoever. It also captured his attempt to plant a taser near Scott’s body to justify the murder.

It would be beyond outrageous if Michael Slager somehow manages to walk free in this case. What type of Policeman’s Discount he receives from the judge during sentencing might be another question, altogether.

Related Posts:

Videos

Dash Camera Video of Native American Kheyanev Littledog Shot By Midland Texas Police Released

On Monday (October 10th), police in Midland Texas shot and killed Native American Kheyanev Littledog, who had been stopped along with another unnamed man, whose presence had not been mentioned in previous coverage of the shooting, while they were walking down the road. Now dash camera video of that shooting has been released.

While the video doesn’t clearly show Littledog in possession of a gun, it does pretty clearly show him reaching toward his waist. However, the second man was reportedly released later without any charges, which brings into question why they were stopped in the first place.

Via the Youtube description of the video:

The Midland Police Department has released video taken from the dashboard camera of one of the officers involved in Monday night’s deadly shooting. In a statement, the Midland Police Department said they released the video because they understand “the importance of community relations in regard to officer-involved shootings.” The released video shows Kheyanev Littledog, 19, on the right in a gray shirt, as well as an acquaintance of his in a blue shirt. The acquaintance was not found to have committed any crime and was released from the scene.

Back on Monday night, officers were called out to the intersection of Terrell St. and Industrial Ave. in Midland in reference to a check person. That’s when, police said, they saw Littledog, 19, with a handgun in his waistband. Police said the footage and witness statements during the investigation revealed that Littledog was reaching for the gun when he was shot by two officers. Littledog was taken to the hospital where he later died. We’re told that Littledog was also in possession of a second firearm in his backpack at the time of the shooting and he wasn’t licensed to carry a firearm.

Via the Midland Reporter-Telegram:

The city of Midland has delivered a video account of the police-involved shooting that took place Monday evening…

Midlander Kheyanev Littledog, 19, was shot by two officers after he reached for a gun in his waistband when confronted by the officers, according to a press release from the city.

During the investigation, officers found that Littledog had a second firearm in his backpack at the time of the shooting. He was not licensed to carry a firearm, according to the release.

The officers, Aaron Renz, 26, and Aaron Trevino, 31, have been placed on administrative leave pending an internal review. Renz is a patrol officer with one year and 10 months at MPD, and Trevino is a K-9 officer who has served the department for seven years and 10 months.

Family Whose Dog Was Murdered by Hartford Police Awarded $202,000; Liens Placed on Cops’ Houses

Last week, a federal jury ruled in favor of a father and daughter whose dog was shot by Hartford police during an illegal search of their property and awarded them $202,000. That award included $32,000 in punitive damages, which the two officers involved are personally responsible for splitting. As a result of that, the judge in the case placed liens on both officers’ houses to ensure they pay.

In addition, the lawyer for the dog’s owners, Glen and “K” Harris, stated that he intends to pursue as much as $640,000 in additional legal fees against the city. The case dragged on for ten years after the incident in which Sgt. Johnmichael O’Hare and Sgt. Anthony Pia shot the St. Bernard belonging to the Harris family while in the process of conducting a search in an attempt to find guns a gang affiliated informant had claimed were in their yard. No guns were found and they had not gotten a warrant for the search.

Via the Hartford Courant:

The case provided a stark look back at a time when the city was threatened with being overwhelmed by a spike in violence caused by warring drug gangs on the north side. The police department had created a new unit to defuse the problem, and officers were under pressure to find and seize illegal caches of weapons.

On Dec. 20, 2006, the gun crackdown ended up at Harris’ home at 297 Enfield St. That morning, O’Hare had been involved in a high-speed pursuit of a suspected stolen car that culminated in a frantic foot chase, over fences and across backyards, in pursuit of the driver.

O’Hare caught the driver, but not before being injured in the chase. He was ordered by a supervisor to report to a hospital for treatment. En route to the hospital, (defense lawyer Thomas) Gerarde said O’Hare and Pia were diverted to Harris’ home.

Another officer had just arrested a gang member who was found to possess dozens of bags of heroin. The gang member wanted to make a deal. If the police helped him get a break with the prosecutors, he would direct them to two guns that he said were hidden in an abandoned car in Harris’ fenced-in property.

Gerarde said O’Hare and Pia raced to 297 Enfield. They walked inside the fence, found no abandoned car and prepared to leave. He said they did not know that, on the other side of the house, Harris’ daughter, identified in court as K, had just returned home from school and had let one of her two St. Bernards out the back door.

K testified that the dog, named Seven and her favorite, suddenly looked up and tore away toward the front of the house.

At the front of the house, Gerarde said, O’Hare and Pia spotted a big dog charging and broke into a “full sprint” to get away. He said O’Hare heard the dog growling and snapping at his heels and turned to command it to stop. When the dog didn’t, Gerarde said, O’Hare shot twice.

K, in the meantime, said she was running toward the front yard on the other side of the house when she heard the two shots. When she got there, she testified that she saw the dog lying on its side and and yelled, “No. Don’t shoot.”

She said O’Hare shot the dog a third time, in the head, then turned to her and said, “I’m sorry, Miss, your dog is not going to make it.”

In the original 2008 trial, a jury ruled against the Harris’ after the judge ruled that no warrant was necessary. However, they appealed the case and won with the verdict being thrown out and a new trial ordered. The jury ruled in their favor this time in large part because the search was considered illegal absent a warrant.

Lawyers for the City of Hartford had stated in court that they will not be paying the remainder of the judgement because the city isn’t required to indemnify police officers implicated in illegal searches. It’s not clear if that means the city will try to force the officers to pay the entire amount and/or any future judgements. Some legal experts have stated that this was simply a bluff by the city in hopes of reducing any damages awarded after it became obvious they would lose.