# Police kill suspect in PS3 robbery **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 5, 2006, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946 "2006-12-05T15:51:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/21 "2006-12-05T19:51:15Z")
Just more fodder for the busybodies who claim that video games lead to violence. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/22 "2006-12-05T19:52:21Z")
[QUOTE=crazyjoe] Perhaps in the eyes of you and the public this is true. However, I’d like to see a legal cite backing this up. The police have admitted that someone got shot during the course of executing their duties, yes, but proving it was murder still rests on the prosecution, much like of someone broke into your house and you shot him, you could admit that you shot him but it still would not prove you guilty of murder. The situations are slightly different, but the law works the same way in either case. [/QUOTE] Shooting and killing another person is homicide by [definition.](http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/homicide) The question then becomes whether the killing was accidentable or justifiable. There is no indication that the shooting in this case was accidental, so the only defense left would be that it was justifiable (i.e. self-defense), in which case the burden is on the [defendant](http://www.recguns.com/Sources/JudUse2.html) > [@](#): > > Affirmative defense: unlike what you were taught in high school civics (innocent until proven guilty; prosecution has the burden of proof), justifiable homicide shifts the burden of proof to the shooter. He is saying: yes, I did it. I was right to take the life of another human being. The up side is that this is a perfect defense (the judge tells the jury: if you believe him, you must find him not guilty). The down side is that it shifts the burden of proof to you. You must prove that you were in immediate, otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm, and that you were an innocent. The defense of justifiablility is reserved for intentional acts. Another [cite](http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=81429) > [@](#): > > Since the claim that a homicide occurred as a result of accident or misfortune in the performance of a lawful act in a lawful manner is a defense, the onus of producing evidence sufficient to raise the defense of excusable homicide remains on the defendant, Would you really think the law would be otherwise? ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/23 "2006-12-05T20:38:18Z")
Interesting. Thanks, **DtC**. This also applies to the NYC shooting. I hope they have a much tougher time explaining 50 shots, including 31 by one officer. ---
**Author:** ![Earthworm\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f07891/32.png) [@Earthworm\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earthworm_Jim)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/24 "2006-12-05T20:48:06Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] The only question that matters is whether he pose any threat to the officers who shot him. [/QUOTE] Agreed > [@](#): > > As far as I’m concerne, it’s up to the cops to prove they were justified, not to anyone else to prove they weren’t. Agreed > [@](#): > > They’re murderers unless **and until** they can prove they had a reason to kill him. (Bolding mine) This is where you go off the rails. What happened to the presumption of innocence? Oh - here it is: > [@](#): > > The cops would be entitled to a presumption of innocence if they were denying that they shot and killed somebody. Oh -hmm. I do not think it means what you think it means. I am presuming _no crime has been committed_. Sure, the burden of proof is on them. Is it wrong that I’m willing to see what they have to offer? > [@](#): > > It’s funny that people always want to afford police shootings a kind of negative burden that they wouldn’t grant anyone else. Wrong again. That six paragraph news-bite tells me very little. Re-write it to say “ **DtC** broke into **RandomMadeUpGuys** house & shot him”, and I’d afford you the same presumption. > [@](#): > > Shooting and killing another person is homicide by definition. Yeah, but you were trying to equate ‘homicide’ with ‘murder’. They are not one-and-the-same. Your own cite explicitly says “ **Included among homicides are murder and manslaughter, but not all homicides are a crime** ” That said, I haven’t seen any updates since this morning, I’ll check around to see if there are any further developments. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/25 "2006-12-05T21:18:55Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] The only question that matters is whether he pose any threat to the officers who shot him. [/QUOTE] Correction. The only question that matters is whether the officers **thought** he posed a threat to them. I could threaten the officers with a ham and cheese sandwich (you know, the kind with the cheese interwoven into the ham) and not pose a threat. But if my ham and cheese sandwich looks like a handgun, and even though it actually poses no threat of bodily harm to anyone, the officers would certainly be justified in killing me. I’ll bet that alledged controller looked more like a handgun than a ham and cheese sandwich. Any debate on this is moot, anyway, until the officers account for their actions. The victims standing of guilt or innocence of the charged crime is also irrelevant. Certainly the officers had proper cause to be there, in that someone had just accused them of a violent felony. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/26 "2006-12-05T21:22:36Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] If I break into your house and kill you, does the state have to prove I _wasn’t_ justified or do I have to prove I _was_? [/QUOTE] Actually, yes, the state does have to prove you were not justified. If the case is prima facie, then the burden shifts. Leastwise that’s how it’s designed to work in American justice. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/27 "2006-12-05T21:30:15Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] There is nothing in the story that says he posed any threat to the officers who busted into his house and killed him. . [/QUOTE] There is also nothing in any of the stories which gives an account of the officers’ state of mind. So, without their testimony, nobody not in that house at that time knows if justification exists or not. > [@](#): > > The Sheriif’s statement that the victim was “a risk and a danger” is just weasel words. He based that characterization on the alleged prior robbery, not on anything that happened at the scene of the shooting and the scene of the shooting is all that matters. A routine mugging is not something which allows the cops to become executioners. How do you know on what the Sherrif based his characterization. I’ll bet it was actually the officers’ testimony, if anything. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/28 "2006-12-05T21:35:21Z")
[QUOTE=Mince] There is also nothing in any of the stories which gives an account of the officers’ state of mind. So, without their testimony, nobody not in that house at that time knows if justification exists or not. [/quote] Any intentional taking of life is a _prima facie_ homicide. If no other evidence is introduced, it’s a crime. It’s up to the cops to prove they had justification. Don’t worr “I thought he had a gun” always works with the public. It’s almost impossible for a cop to get in any real trouble as long as he says the magic words. > [@](#): > > How do you know on what the Sherrif based his characterization. I’ll bet it was actually the officers’ testimony, if anything. He _said_ that’s what his characterization was based on, as I’ve already pointed out. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/29 "2006-12-05T21:36:22Z")
[QUOTE=Mince] Actually, yes, the state does have to prove you were not justified. If the case is prima facie, then the burden shifts. Leastwise that’s how it’s designed to work in American justice. [/QUOTE] An intentional taking of life IS a _prima facie_ homicide. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/30 "2006-12-05T21:39:58Z")
[QUOTE=Mince] Correction. The only question that matters is whether the officers **thought** he posed a threat to them. [/quote] Which is why the magic words always work, unfortunately. ---
**Author:** ![MagicEyes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@MagicEyes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MagicEyes)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/31 "2006-12-05T22:07:26Z")
The police were just a teensy bit edgy because they saw photo of one the suspects (Ryan Mills–not Peyton Strickland, the one who got shot) posing with a bunch of guns, and they knew he sometimes carries a gun. Strickland’s roommate said he probably was holding a wireless game controller (I think the wireless bit is important). The police were expecting the suspects to be armed, and if they saw something that looked like a gun, it’s not unreasonable for them to defend themselves. I couldn’t find the photo online, but the [News & Observer](http://www.newsobserver.com/) ran it in the paper today. The kid who was killed had been charged with assault for breaking a guy’s jaw a few months ago, so he’s not the innocent, sweet kid his family is trying to make him seem to be. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/32 "2006-12-05T22:07:57Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] An intentional taking of life IS a _prima facie_ homicide. [/QUOTE] Sure, but who determines the taking of life was “intentional”? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/33 "2006-12-05T22:15:16Z")
[QUOTE=Mince] Sure, but who determines the taking of life was “intentional”? [/QUOTE] I haven’t seen any claim that the killing in this case was accidental, have you? ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2006, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/34 "2006-12-05T22:30:53Z")
[QUOTE=Mince] Correction. The only question that matters is whether the officers **thought** he posed a threat to them. I could threaten the officers with a ham and cheese sandwich (you know, the kind with the cheese interwoven into the ham) and not pose a threat. But if my ham and cheese sandwich looks like a handgun, and even though it actually poses no threat of bodily harm to anyone, the officers would certainly be justified in killing me. [/QUOTE] Thing is, though, my understanding of this sort of case is that the officers can’t simply claim to have thought the guy posed a threat, and that’s it. I was under the impression that, for the officers to be justified, they have to demonstrate a “reasonable belief” (or something similar) that they guy was a threat to them. That is, they have to convince whoever is making the evaluation (a jury, etc.) that, given all the circumstances, it was reasonable for them to believe that the guy posed a threat.\* If he was, indeed, standing there with nothing but a ham and cheese sandwich, it will (or, at least, should) be difficult to argue that two armed police officers should have felt threatened by him. - Obviously, the exact wording varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; it would be interesting to hear a lawyer’s take on this issue. ---
**Author:** ![Thalion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f475e1/32.png) [@Thalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thalion)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2006, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/35 "2006-12-06T04:07:03Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] Like I said, his assertion that the victim was a “risk and a danger” was based on his assumption that the victim had committed a prior armed robbery, not on anything that happened at the scene. Since any prior alleged crime is irrelevant to whether the shooting was justified, his statement can only be categorized as weaseling. [/QUOTE] That is not 100% accurate. Any review of a use of force must take into consideration _everything_ known to the officer at the time. Knowledge that a suspect may be violent or armed is obviously relevant to the question of justification. Even if the basis of that belief is later found to be incorrect, how could you expect an officer to disregard information like that? **Diogenes** , I respect you a great deal. I agree that sometimes police officers can get away too easily with using force (anything up to and including deadly force) and we need to be closely watched. However, I believe it is vanishingly rare that cops intentionally kill people then make up reasons to justifiy it. I know a lot of cops, and none of them ever want to be forced to kill. I know that I pray I will never be in that situation. I know a couple of officers who have had to do so, and it takes a terrible toll on them. I don’t think you can imagine what it is like to charge into a room after someone you know might be armed and willing to kill you to keep from going to jail. If that person turns towards you with a dark object in his hand, would you wait to see if it fires before you protect yourself? I would like to believe that I would always wait until I was absolutely sure that he was holding a deadly weapon. But when you’re life is on the line, you may react too quickly. It’s always a tragedy, but it is almost never a crime. As others have said, we should wait for more details about this incident before making any judgements. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2006, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/36 "2006-12-06T04:33:49Z")
On reflection, I think deliberate, wanton murder is far less likely than excited overreaction, panic and possibly poor training. The shooting was more likely to have been reckless and/or incompetent than intentionally criminal, so calling the “murderers until proven otherwise” was over the top on my part. Still, I’ll have a hard time buying any argument that the shooting was necessary. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2006, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/37 "2006-12-06T08:24:27Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] Cops must have the worst vision of any occupation. [/QUOTE] In a profession where it is possible to get shot from someone attempting to avoid, say, a _mere_ drunk driving arrest, and given the rapid death-causing nature of firearms, it’s not very surprising some officers don’t hesitate to use their firearm. But I’d also wager that many more law enforcement officers than not, at their own peril, use much more caution than is due. > [@](#): > > The number of objects which seem to get mistaken for guns (including wallets, game controllers and nothing at all) is staggering. The sad thing is that all any cop ever has to say is “I thought he had a gun” and it’s an automatic get-out-of-jail card. Like I said, it imposes an impossible negative burden. How can it ever be proven that the shooter didn’t think the victim had a gun? It allows the cops to kill with impunity. As long as they say the magic words, “I thought he had a gun,” nothing will ever happen to them. I’m just curious: how many officers, do you think, shoot to kill a suspect _without_ believing the suspect had a dangerous weapon which represented an immediate threat of bodily harm? [QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] I haven’t seen any claim that the killing in this case was accidental, have you? [/QUOTE] No. I haven’t seen any claim either way. But I’m laying a huge wager that the officers will claim it was, not accidental, of course, but justified. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2006, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/38 "2006-12-06T20:53:21Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] It’s up to the cops to prove they had justification. Don’t worr “I thought he had a gun” always works with the public. It’s almost impossible for a cop to get in any real trouble as long as he says the magic words. [/QUOTE] I don’t necessarily agree. I believe there is a minimal standard. If a cop states that he thought a suspect had a gun, and investigation reveals that the suspect actually had a banana, I don’t think the officer would have any legal standing. In the instant case, the suspect/victim had a violent history, appeared in at least one photograph wielding sophisticated weaponry and likely had a small black object in his hand when the officers confronted him. However, I do find the shooting at least a little dubious. Unless the suspect had the object in his hand in a rasied position (which would be very illogical), the officers certainly should have given him a command to drop the object and time to comply. [Article from New York Daily News](http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/477354p-401454c.html) > [@](#): > > Roommate Mike Rhoton said Strickland was unarmed when he got up from playing a Tiger Woods golf game but may have been holding a controller **when he went to the door as officers bashed it in.** This is very suspect to me. Did the officers ring the doorbell first? “Please come outside Mr. alleged viloent criminal.” Their protocol for apprehending a viloent suspect includes prior notification? Why “bash the door in” if you’re going to knock first? Why was the suspect/victim going to the door if the officers didn’t knock? Of course much is still unknown and unanswered; and I soundly reserve my judgement. But for the reason laid out above, I at least am willing to consider the officers may have been justified in shooting the suspect. \*\*emphasis added ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2006, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/39 "2006-12-06T22:15:35Z")
[QUOTE=Mince] This is very suspect to me. Did the officers ring the doorbell first? “Please come outside Mr. alleged viloent criminal.” Their protocol for apprehending a viloent suspect includes prior notification? Why “bash the door in” if you’re going to knock first? Why was the suspect/victim going to the door if the officers didn’t knock? [/QUOTE] The same question came up in the thread about the 90 year old lady being shot by the cops. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2006, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946/40 "2006-12-07T02:04:06Z")
[QUOTE=adam yax] The same question came up in the thread about the 90 year old lady being shot by the cops. [/QUOTE] I havn’t even glanced at that thread; but I will. That is another one that perplexes me. Did they really need to charge a 90-year-old woman’s domicile to apprehend her? Lost in this PS3 tragedy is this most disturbing aspect: > [@](#): > > The sheriff said the robbery victim waited in line for three days to buy the units for $641 each… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/police-kill-suspect-in-ps3-robbery/382946.md?page=3)