Dash cam of shooting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzOecK1uNUA
Independent report:
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/news/2010...is_5_11_09.pdf
Ultimately it is our finding that significant tactical errors that rose to the level of recklessness were made by the involved officers, and that but for this recklessness the use of deadly physical force might very well have been avoided. While we have also found that the use of deadly physical force by Office Quintana was not justified, as any belief that there was an imminent danger to himself or others was not objectively reasonable, it was ultimately the reckless tactics employed by Officer Quintana in the first place that directly led to his use of deadly force and ultimately the taking of the life of one individual and seriously wounding of another.
Based on Independent analysis, the settlement was not unreasonable. However, if I was a felon, currently committing additional felonies, in violation of my probation, ripped on multiple drugs, suspected in multiple violent robberies within a car associated with those crimes, having a pistol discovered on my person, and beginning to make rapid fleeing actions, I would not be surprised at all if I ended up getting shot upon any police interaction..
Originally Posted by Billy_Saul
I had read the report you posted before. It's hard for people to understand when they read a report like this, but things don't always play out quite so neatly and controlled as the report indicates they should have. In any use of force, when you look at the situation
after the fact, it's easy to dissect what someone could have done differently.
The report makes clear that Officer Quintana was trying to find and apprehend wanted felons that he had every reason to believe were a menace to the community. Sticking a gun in someone's mouth and making them beg for their life, robbing a man in a wheelchair, actions like that put a criminal in the dangerous category, meaning, you want someone like that off the street as soon as possible.
Would a picture perfect felony stop of this vehicle and it's occupants have prevented this shooting?
Maybe, maybe not. There's nothing to prevent people from running during a felony car stop and Officer Quintana made it clear that based on what these guys were alleged to have done, he didn't want them to get away. That's why he approached and apprehended the driver and that's why he went back to the car to make contact with Sanders.
He felt that if they were asleep, maybe that was their best chance to take them into custody without them escaping. Once the struggle ensued in the car over the gun that Nathanial Sanders had in his waistband, things went downhill from there.
It's true that hindsight is always 20/20.
Tactically, things could have been done better. No doubt about it.
Would that have changed the outcome? We'll never know. Should the city pay out $750,000 based on this? I simply don't agree.
If cities and counties start paying out every time an Officer makes a tactical error, the general funds of those cities and counties will soon dry up.
Did Officer Quintana act within the law? Yes he did. A Grand Jury certainly thought so.
Chief Acevedo gave Quintana a 15 day suspension for not turning his lights/camera on.
The rest is certainly open for panels and investigative bodies to come in and pick apart after the fact as this report did.
It wasn't like he was trigger happy. He took the driver into custody without incident before the shooting. But when you're leaning into a car and a suspected robber tries to fight with you over a gun in his waistband, well, like you said Billy Saul, one shouldn't be surprised if you wind up shot.