Nashville Shootout Body Cam Footage

[deerslayer]

1 hour ago, Omega said:

She will get a settlement.

And BLM will be chanting her name in a year.  

[Daniel]

On 3/13/2021 at 8:00 AM, Defender said:

If nothing else, it illustrates what Red333 said above.  Things can go sideways in  New York minute!  I imagine this video, or more likely the original unedited version of it will be become a training video at the police academy.  Prayers for the officer..  

It will be like the one that ended terribly with the officer screaming as he was killed by the crazy ass Vietnam vet (no offense intended fellow crazy vets).

By this I mean the officer... a training officer I have read, failed to keep her out of her purse or car.   I do appreciate that he maintained his composure.  He stayed patient.  He did not get physical at the first sign of resistance.  I am very sorry he was shot but overjoyed that he has lived.  The woman involved did die so continuing to shoot* her was unnecessary and thankfully she did not attempt to run him over.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Daniel

[Daniel]

On 3/13/2021 at 11:00 PM, Grayfox54 said:

I'll simply say it looks like a good shoot to me. Too bad backup didn't arrive sooner. But then they may have had their hands full at the time too. Lots of valid points on other aspects of it, but I won't judge. The good guy won. That's all that really matters. 

MNPD is notoriously understaffed.

[Swamp ash]

I think the officer reacted pretty quickly to someone who got the drop on him (admittedly, he needed to control the situation better up front).

I hope he mends well.

[E4 No More]

As a former LEO, my opinion was that he failed to control the situation from the start, and it cost a life and his health. I would NEVER let a person that I have stopped go in and out of the car like he did. That was just asking for trouble. Psychologically speaking, it allows the suspect to feel like they are in control, and when he tried to cuff her, her mindset was abruptly changed. Since he is a training officer I expect better out of him. Granted, I was a LEO a long time ago, and the current environment for LEOs is much different than what I had to work in, but base tactics should be the same.

[OldIronFan]

1 hour ago, E4 No More said:

As a former LEO, my opinion was that he failed to control the situation from the start,

I am a civilian middle aged white guy with no LEO experience and I felt the exact same way. I watched the video and kept thinking it was a prime example of how not to conduct a traffic and potential felony stop. I expected him to be far more in control of the situation especially as she got out of the vehicle. He also did not seem to truly block the vehicle in. Letting her keep going in and out of the car and just milling around beside seemed like a big red flag to me. I would have expected him to want her standing or sitting on the curb away from the vehicle doors, likely at the front of the car. 

The only thing I saw positive was his calm non escalating demeanor up to the point things went sideways. I did not see anything that could have been misconstrued as aggressive behavior or tone from the officer during the initial portion of the stop. It was almost as if he was going out of his way to not agitate her any further. Obviously that failed. 

I have been stopped for speeding and had troopers/officers approach my car with more caution, address me more firmly, follow (what I assume is) protocol, and maintain more control of the situation. Granted it has been a close to a decade since my last traffic stop but I find it hard to believe good practices for stops have changed that drastically in >10 years. 

[E4 No More]

7 minutes ago, OldIronFan said:

I am a civilian middle aged white guy with no LEO experience and I felt the exact same way. I watched the video and kept thinking it was a prime example of how not to conduct a traffic and potential felony stop. I expected him to be far more in control of the situation especially as she got out of the vehicle. He also did not seem to truly block the vehicle in. Letting her keep going in and out of the car and just milling around beside seemed like a big red flag to me. I would have expected him to want her standing or sitting on the curb away from the vehicle doors, likely at the front of the car. 

The only thing I saw positive was his calm non escalating demeanor up to the point things went sideways. I did not see anything that could have been misconstrued as aggressive behavior or tone from the officer during the initial portion of the stop. It was almost as if he was going out of his way to not agitate her any further. Obviously that failed. 

I have been stopped for speeding and had troopers/officers approach my car with more caution, address me more firmly, follow (what I assume is) protocol, and maintain more control of the situation. Granted it has been a close to a decade since my last traffic stop but I find it hard to believe good practices for stops have changed that drastically in >10 years. 

Back in the day, if I ran a traffic stop on a car with felony warrants I would have called for backup immediately and performed a felony car stop. Things have changed, I guess.

[E4 No More]

On 3/12/2021 at 8:05 PM, Omega said:

Just released, footage of the shootout at the Dollar General in Nashville.  Goes to show, you need to be on your toes even when all things seem calm.

What is body "camp" video?

[Omega]

4 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

What is body "camp" video?

Ha, thanks for the heads up, must of either fat fingered it or the infamous autocorrect did its thing.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Omega

[JayC]

Ok, I'm probably in the minority here, but what was his reason for continuing the stop after he determined there was no male in the vehicle?  He lost all probable cause to continue the detainment of the female driver instant he knew the wanted felon was not present. 

Why was he going through the drivers bag to begin with?  He no longer had the right to detain her, he didn't have her consent to search the bag. 

We can talk about the fact he was nice to the lady, but the truth is it appears he violated her constitutional rights and escalated the situation into an arrest without probable cause that a crime was committed at the point he was digging around in her purse.

As she said, 'him having warrants has nothing to do with me'.

Don't get me wrong, she should have just shut up and let the arrest go forward, a good lawyer would have been able to throw shade on the detention and the search of the bag, might have even got the drugs thrown out.  \

Shooting the cop was wrong, but the situation is a lot more nuance IMHO.

[Chucktshoes]

46 minutes ago, JayC said:

Ok, I'm probably in the minority here, but what was his reason for continuing the stop after he determined there was no male in the vehicle?  He lost all probable cause to continue the detainment of the female driver instant he knew the wanted felon was not present. 

Why was he going through the drivers bag to begin with?  He no longer had the right to detain her, he didn't have her consent to search the bag. 

We can talk about the fact he was nice to the lady, but the truth is it appears he violated her constitutional rights and escalated the situation into an arrest without probable cause that a crime was committed at the point he was digging around in her purse.

As she said, 'him having warrants has nothing to do with me'.

Don't get me wrong, she should have just shut up and let the arrest go forward, a good lawyer would have been able to throw shade on the detention and the search of the bag, might have even got the drugs thrown out.  \

Shooting the cop was wrong, but the situation is a lot more nuance IMHO.

You bring up some valid points. I’d like to hear from the current and former LE regarding them. 

[chances R]

I would disagree with you on the 'probable cause" point.  Driving a suspected felon's car with outstanding warrants would create PC IMO.  Did she steal the car?  Part of a drug dealers distributor?  If she had been more cooperative, maybe she wouldn't have gotten so much attention.  

[JayC]

1 hour ago, chances R said:

I would disagree with you on the 'probable cause" point.  Driving a suspected felon's car with outstanding warrants would create PC IMO.  Did she steal the car?  Part of a drug dealers distributor?  If she had been more cooperative, maybe she wouldn't have gotten so much attention.  

The probable cause to pull the vehicle over was iffy at best to begin with, officers aren't allowed to break down your door and search your house with just an arrest warrant, they are required to get a search warrant or have exigent circumstances to search the home (such as seeing the wanted felon through the window of the home).

This officer pulled the vehicle over for what seems to be the sole reason the vehicle was owned by somebody with a warrant.  He clearly didn't see the owner in the vehicle, he couldn't claim to have even seen a male who *might* have been the owner.  Now with current case law, this might have been a valid stop (it shouldn't be, it's clearly unconstitutional but that is another matter).  But the instant he knew the vehicle didn't contain a male, any probable cause he had for pulling the vehicle over went out the window.

Why would you or the officer think she stolen this vehicle?  Why would you or the officer think she was involved in drug dealing?  Remember a hunch doesn't count, you have to have specific reasonable articulable suspicion that crime is afoot. 

People borrow others cars all the time, there doesn't appear to be a broken window, or damage to the vehicle that indicates theft, and she clearly has the keys to the vehicle.  There doesn't appear to be any evidence to suggest she stole the car.

As for being a drug dealer, I didn't see a set of scales, or large amounts of cash in the vehicle, or anything that would indicate proof that she was involved in dealing drugs. 

Did you see something I missed?

Even the police's own video doesn't claim the officer stopped the vehicle for a traffic violation, which lets be honest is such a low bar to violate somebody's civil rights it's a joke IMHO.

And again, I'm not trying to suggest any of this was a good reason to resist arrest or shoot the police officer.  I'm just pointing out the start of this interaction, and the continuation of it after he saw the sole occupant was a female seems to be questionable at best.

Edited March 18, 2021 by JayC

[KahrMan]

2 hours ago, JayC said:

Ok, I'm probably in the minority here, but what was his reason for continuing the stop after he determined there was no male in the vehicle?  He lost all probable cause to continue the detainment of the female driver instant he knew the wanted felon was not present. 

Why was he going through the drivers bag to begin with?  He no longer had the right to detain her, he didn't have her consent to search the bag. 

We can talk about the fact he was nice to the lady, but the truth is it appears he violated her constitutional rights and escalated the situation into an arrest without probable cause that a crime was committed at the point he was digging around in her purse.

As she said, 'him having warrants has nothing to do with me'.

Don't get me wrong, she should have just shut up and let the arrest go forward, a good lawyer would have been able to throw shade on the detention and the search of the bag, might have even got the drugs thrown out.  \

Shooting the cop was wrong, but the situation is a lot more nuance IMHO.

When he walked up to the car to talk to her one of the first things he asked her was where the weed was.  Raw weed is very easy to smell when you are not around it everyday.  I am sure he smelled it.  She said it was in her bag and let him retrieve it.  

Edited March 18, 2021 by KahrMan

[JayC]

1 minute ago, KahrMan said:

When he walked up to the car to talk to her one of the first things he asked her was where the weed was.  Raw weed is very easy to smell when you are not around it everyday.  I am sure he smelled it.  She said it was in her bag and let him retrieve it.  

Can you tell me where you're hearing that, I've watched the MNPD video twice and must have missed it both times?

Edited March 18, 2021 by JayC

[KahrMan]

18 minutes ago, JayC said:

Can you tell me where you're hearing that, I've watched the MNPD video twice and must have missed it both times?

It is edited so you don't see everything but at 3:45 he says "it's just in here" while holding her bag and she says yes sir.  He must have already said he smelled the weed.  By saying its just in here is referencing something already said  That in combination with him saying I know the guy ins't in here but we have to take care of the other problems leads me to believe he smelled the weed when he first walked up.  Since parts of the conversation is missing I am making an educated guess based on what he said and what she said.

[JayC]

Just now, KahrMan said:

It is edited so you don't see everything but at 3:45 he says "it's just in here" while holding her bag and she says yes sir.  He must have already said he smelled the weed.  By saying its just in here is referencing something already said  That in combination with him saying I know the guy ins't in here but we have to take care of the other problems leads me to believe he smelled the weed when he first walked up.  Since parts of the conversation is missing I am making an educated guess based on what he said and what she said.

I took it to mean he was asking for her drivers license (or other documentation), and the way he responds to finding the possible drugs he says 'what is this?', not 'is this it?'.  So if he smelled drugs, he never stated that in the video, and you'd think they would have included that part of the video if he did.

And her going back into the vehicle to retrieve something from her purse makes more sense if she was hunting for her ID (or other documents) than he smelled drugs and wanted to conduct a search of the vehicle.  If you're right, I believe he violated even more department policies than already highlighted.

Again without the entire video we're left with gaps...  but my impression is when the video restarts with him standing next to her and the open car door, is that he wants to ID her, and ask her questions about where the wanted felon is, not that he smells drugs and he's going to conduct a search of her vehicle.

[lock n' load]

Here's my take on all this..

1. Don't associate with wanted felons.

2. Don't drive  a vehicle if the person who owns it is a wanted felon.

3. Don't be "riding dirty".

4. Having a bad attitude and resisting arrest won't get you far.

5. Pulling and/or using a weapon on a LEO will most likely get you killed.

To sum it up..I don't have any sympathy for her or anyone else who acts like that. 

[m16ty]

12 hours ago, E4 No More said:

As a former LEO, my opinion was that he failed to control the situation from the start, and it cost a life and his health. I would NEVER let a person that I have stopped go in and out of the car like he did. That was just asking for trouble. Psychologically speaking, it allows the suspect to feel like they are in control, and when he tried to cuff her, her mindset was abruptly changed. Since he is a training officer I expect better out of him. Granted, I was a LEO a long time ago, and the current environment for LEOs is much different than what I had to work in, but base tactics should be the same.

IMO, the reason the cop was giving her so much lead way is a direct result of the current climate between cops and minorities. Cops today are sacred to death that they will get a civil rights charge or worse against them. Him acting like he did, due to the current political climate, appears to be a contributing factor in the cop getting shot.

[m16ty]

I finally watched the whole video, where it showed the car cam video. From the vantage point of the car, it does look like the officer just gave up there at the end. It didn't look like he was physically unable to continue the fight, it looked like his was mentally unable. He had enough strength to at least get to his knees, but he just sat there on his knees and watched her drive away. She could have finished him off execution style if she wanted. One would think you would either pick up your gun (fight) or tried to drag yourself to cover (flight), but he just sat there kind of dumbfounded. 

Not trying to blame the officer, I don't know if I could have done any better, and it's really easy to sit here in a chair and critique the officer. This should be something to look at and learn from though. 

[JayC]

2 hours ago, lock n' load said:

Here's my take on all this..

1. Don't associate with wanted felons.

2. Don't drive  a vehicle if the person who owns it is a wanted felon.

3. Don't be "riding dirty".

4. Having a bad attitude and resisting arrest won't get you far.

5. Pulling and/or using a weapon on a LEO will most likely get you killed.

To sum it up..I don't have any sympathy for her or anyone else who acts like that. 

Well, I tend to agree you, my only exception is excusing possible unconstitutional actions on the part of the police officer as being justified by her driving a car legally.

Don't get me wrong, she hit ever branch of the stupid decision tree on the way down...  But, that doesn't excuse questionable acts by the officer that landed both of them in that situation to begin with.

[Omega]

1 hour ago, JayC said:

Well, I tend to agree you, my only exception is excusing possible unconstitutional actions on the part of the police officer as being justified by her driving a car legally.

Don't get me wrong, she hit ever branch of the stupid decision tree on the way down...  But, that doesn't excuse questionable acts by the officer that landed both of them in that situation to begin with.

I personally don't see ANY unconstitutional actions, none.  He pulled over a vehicle that was flagged as belonging to someone with warrants.  Once stopped, and seen who was driving, he still had to make contact with the driver.   She jumped right out of the vehicle once stopped, not smart, and usually shows there may be an issue in the vehicle.  It does not show how he confirms he was not in the car, just him saying it.  Her fumbling around in her purse, is IMO, a no-go, that is probably when she removed the gun from her purse; he asks what she took out.    Then he finds the pot, so from that point on she is not going anywhere, he calls for the female officer.  She keeps going into her car, and if not for the anti cop atmosphere, he would have taken control of her and cuffed her then and there.  But no, she gets back into her purse, and when he says she will be arrested all hell broke loose.

[E4 No More]

11 hours ago, m16ty said:

IMO, the reason the cop was giving her so much lead way is a direct result of the current climate between cops and minorities. Cops today are sacred to death that they will get a civil rights charge or worse against them. Him acting like he did, due to the current political climate, appears to be a contributing factor in the cop getting shot.

I don't disagree, which is why I referred to the current environment in my post.

[E4 No More]

On 3/17/2021 at 7:15 PM, JayC said:

The probable cause to pull the vehicle over was iffy at best to begin with, officers aren't allowed to break down your door and search your house with just an arrest warrant, they are required to get a search warrant or have exigent circumstances to search the home (such as seeing the wanted felon through the window of the home).

This officer pulled the vehicle over for what seems to be the sole reason the vehicle was owned by somebody with a warrant.  He clearly didn't see the owner in the vehicle, he couldn't claim to have even seen a male who *might* have been the owner.  Now with current case law, this might have been a valid stop (it shouldn't be, it's clearly unconstitutional but that is another matter).  But the instant he knew the vehicle didn't contain a male, any probable cause he had for pulling the vehicle over went out the window.

Why would you or the officer think she stolen this vehicle?  Why would you or the officer think she was involved in drug dealing?  Remember a hunch doesn't count, you have to have specific reasonable articulable suspicion that crime is afoot. 

People borrow others cars all the time, there doesn't appear to be a broken window, or damage to the vehicle that indicates theft, and she clearly has the keys to the vehicle.  There doesn't appear to be any evidence to suggest she stole the car.

As for being a drug dealer, I didn't see a set of scales, or large amounts of cash in the vehicle, or anything that would indicate proof that she was involved in dealing drugs. 

Did you see something I missed?

Even the police's own video doesn't claim the officer stopped the vehicle for a traffic violation, which lets be honest is such a low bar to violate somebody's civil rights it's a joke IMHO.

And again, I'm not trying to suggest any of this was a good reason to resist arrest or shoot the police officer.  I'm just pointing out the start of this interaction, and the continuation of it after he saw the sole occupant was a female seems to be questionable at best.

Well, granted it's been 28 years since I was a LEO, but I believe that you are wrong on a couple of things. First of all, the video starts during the conversation where she has gotten back into the car after immediately exiting the vehicle; therefore, you cannot see or hear what transpired before the video starts. If the officer smelled the odor of marijuana, that is probable cause to continue the Terry Stop. This is innuendo as the officer references "other problems." During a Terry Stop an officer has the right to check for weapons on or about the subject which includes the vehicle. That excludes any locked compartments which would require a search warrant unless the car was being impounded after an arrest. The bag is not a locked compartment and can easily contain a weapon. She was also acting suspicious and ignoring the officers commands. She surrendered the bag to the officer, and then he asked her what she took out of it. That means he saw her take something out of the bag and could have seen her try to hide it. After she has surrendered her bag he asks her "So it's just in here?" to which she says yes, and he then pulls out a bag of what I assume to be marijuana, and asks her if that was it to which she also says yes. She even acknowledges that it's "a bag of weed" while holding the phone to her ear. He then finds powdery substance that I can only assume looking like drugs since that isn't shown. Face powder doesn't look like cocaine, and I assume that he knows the difference. Even possession of a dusting of cocaine is a felony. That's when he calls car 25 to see if he/she is available for what I assume is for backup. From there the goes sideways.

I see absolutely no violations of her civil rights.

Edited March 19, 2021 by E4 No More

[Dirtshooter]

This should serve as a reminder to all of us. Even the LEO can't get LEO backup to them quick enough. You/me should assume we are on our own and the cavalry may not get to us in time to help, but maybe just to do the chalk outlines!! That is why where I reside and 30 minutes or more before the cavalry arrives, 1,100-1,200 FPS are my backup!