I have mixed feelings on this....

[cycleguy2300]

While opening door with gun in hand is stupid, it is not illegal and does not constitute use of deadly force.

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

Since there was no use of deadly force, shooter does not get (A) exemption.

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force;



1) Talk to the actual complainant, and not 3rd party who was witness to nothing. It was like a game of telephone.

2) Stand outside door a few minutes listening and see if he gets any probable cause or at least reasonable suspicion a crime is in progress.

3) Also, absent a warrant, the order to open the door was unlawful and unconstitutional.

I respectfully, but vehemently disagree.

Holding a handgun when opening the door constitutes a threat of deadly force.

That he was in his own house has VERY little to do with the deputy's decision making process., the deceased knew or should have known it was LE.

Had there been time and space, sure the deputy could have trued to communicate more and see what the guy was going to do, but he didnt have time or space to do that.

The "he could have...", "I would have done...", also has nothing to do with the justification of when the subject opened the door with gun in hand he was a deadly threat to the deputy so long as the deputy had a legal right to be there (called for a possible FV is legal right).

Unless there is something that happened before or during that I am not seeing, I believe courts will ultimately find this to be a justifiable homicide.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Renegade]

I respectfully, but vehemently disagree.

Holding a handgun when opening the door constitutes a threat of deadly force.

Did you read ANY of it?

Cause it actually says holding a weapon is a threat a of deadly force, which is what you wrote, and that (Essentially open carry) is 100% legal in your own abode in just about every state. The deceased was shot and killed while engaging in 100% legal behavior, not even a Class C Misdemeanor.

For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

Problem for the officer is you cannot shoot someone over a threat, they have to actually be using or trying to use deadly force, which a threat is not:

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force;

And yes, this happened in Florida, so Texas law does not apply obviously, but for discussion, I'll allow it.

 

[leVieux]

He forgot to yell "stop resisting", too

Shit like this is why I never answer the door at all (exception for Tiff's treats delivery). There's been times in the past I've come to the door armed to look through the peep hole, but I'm just getting ready in case someone kicks it in; still wouldn't answer the door. Looking out the peep hole would have done no good in this instance with the deputy hiding from it. I've got cameras now that you can't approach my door without being caught on so peep hole is superfluous.

<>

Right.

Ayoob stresses JUST DON’T OPEN THE DOOR.

Our Sheriff says same thing.

As for Sasquatch; I have lost two neighbors and a schoolmate to home invaders; so don’t tell me that it doesn’t happen.

I speak to all the LEO’s in my area; often buy them a lunch, so they know us.

Even if I saw an unlnown person in uniform on my porch late at night, I’d call the Sheriff first.

<>

 

[seeker_two]

This is the result of firearms training that emphasizes draw-to-first-shot times and shoot-until-down over evaluating situations. Moving off the X would have given both parties enough time to avoid a tragedy.

 

[cycleguy2300]

This is the result of firearms training that emphasizes draw-to-first-shot times and shoot-until-down over evaluating situations. Moving off the X would have given both parties enough time to avoid a tragedy.

Are you familiar with the ABC's?

Moving to cover in a close engagement before shooting is directly contrary to training.

The gun in hand has a huge advantage and was a deadly force threat justifying deadly force by the deputy.

Let me ask yall this: Is it remotely possible the man was going to shoot the deputy after opening the door?

Remember he came to a door with a gun IN HAND when the deputy is CLEARLY announcing himself. Why?

Show me a similar court case (criminal) where the officer was charged/convicted, because if the officer was in the wrong we could expect to see pllots of convictions becaise it happens OFTEN.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[seeker_two]

Are you familiar with the ABC's?

Moving to cover in a close engagement before shooting is directly contrary to training.

The gun in hand has a huge advantage and was a deadly force threat justifying deadly force by the deputy.

Let me ask yall this: Is it remotely possible the mand was going to shoot the deputy after opening the door?

Remember he came to a door with a gun IN HAND when the deputy is CLEARLY announcing himself. Why?

Show me a similar court case (criminal) where the officer was charged/convicted, because if the officer was in the wrong we could expect to see pllots of convictions becaise it happens OFTEN.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

First....I hope CG never works in my area.....

Second....the fact that you consider this a "close engagement" instead of a contact with a citizen in the course of an investigation really worries me concerning the training you have. If you were working near the Crimean border, that would be a healthy attitude. In suburban Florida USA, not so much. A successful call is when EVERYBODY goes home safe....

 

[Renegade]

The gun in hand has a huge advantage and was a deadly force threat justifying deadly force by the deputy.

As already pointed out twice, deadly force is not justified on a threat alone. This guy was not breaking a single law. The commands to open the door had no legal authority. The officer fucked up from the get-go, by not even talking to the complainant.

Let me ask yall this: Is it remotely possible the mand was going to shoot the deputy after opening the door?

Remember he came to a door with a gun IN HAND when the deputy is CLEARLY announcing himself. Why?

No, not even remotely possible. It appeared to me he was expecting friends at the door, and was surprised to see the officer. He may or may not have heard the officer announce, if he was face-timing he might have had buds on, or perhaps he thought his friends were pranking him, But no way does he give any indication he was going to shoot anybody or expecting trouble either.

Show me a similar court case (criminal) where the officer was charged/convicted, because if the officer was in the wrong we could expect to see pllots of convictions becaise it happens OFTEN.

If by "similar" you mean officers shooting innocent people in their own homes (armed or unarmed) I have lost count. We had one in Dallas (open door), Ft Worth (through window), Houston (through door), Austin (shot on porch), etc. It is an epidemic.

This was an avoidable tragedy on both sides.

 

[Havok1]

Are you familiar with the ABC's?

Moving to cover in a close engagement before shooting is directly contrary to training.

The gun in hand has a huge advantage and was a deadly force threat justifying deadly force by the deputy.

Let me ask yall this: Is it remotely possible the mand was going to shoot the deputy after opening the door?

Remember he came to a door with a gun IN HAND when the deputy is CLEARLY announcing himself. Why?

Show me a similar court case (criminal) where the officer was charged/convicted, because if the officer was in the wrong we could expect to see pllots of convictions becaise it happens OFTEN.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

It may have been clear that he announced himself as police from outside, but that doesn’t mean it was clear from inside the apartment where the victim was, especially if he was on the phone.


And if this happens “OFTEN” then maybe that should be a clue that there’s a problem with training for police.

 

[Havok1]

Earlier in the thread there had been some discussion over whether the officer had gone to the correct apartment.

An apartment complex manager called the sheriff’s office at 4:24 p.m. and Duran arrived three minutes later. He met the manager in the parking lot and she directed him to Fortson’s fourth-floor apartment, telling him there are frequent arguments, body camera video shows.

However, 911 records show deputies had never been called to Fortson’s apartment previously but they had been called to a nearby unit 10 times in the previous eight months, including once for a domestic disturbance.

Florida sheriff's office fires deputy who fatally shot airman at home

A Florida sheriff on Friday fired a deputy who fatally shot an airman at his home while holding a handgun pointed to the ground, saying the deputy’s life was never in danger and he should not have fired his weapon.

apnews.com

 

[Renegade]

Deputy was FIRED earlier today:

Eddie Duran, the Okaloosa Sheriff's Office deputy who shot Senior Airman Roger Fortson on May 3, was terminated from the department on Friday, according to a sheriff's office statement obtained by ABC News.

Deputy fired after fatally shooting airman in his own home; victim's mother wants criminal charges

Eddie Duran, the Okaloosa Sheriff's Office deputy who shot Senior Airman Roger Fortson on May 3, was terminated from the department on Friday, according to a sheriff's office statement obtained by ABC News.

abc11.com

 

[Renegade]

A Florida Panhandle sheriff on Friday fired a deputy who fatally shot an airman at his home while holding a handgun pointed to the ground, saying the deputy’s life was never in danger and he should not have fired his weapon.

A sheriff’s internal affairs investigation released Friday concluded that, “Mr. Fortson did not make any hostile, attacking movements, and therefore, the former deputy’s use of deadly force was not objectively reasonable.”

have also said that an officer cannot shoot only because a possible suspect is holding a gun if there is no threat.

Mr. Fortson did not commit any crime.

“This tragic incident should have never occurred"

Imagine that. They confirmed every point I made.

 

[Renegade]

Basically Karen could not mind her own fucking business and needed drama, now an Airman is dead, an officer is FIRED and likely facing jail. Karen didn't even have courage to call 911 herself. What POS.

Seriously hope Crump goes after Karen. But he generally only follows the money.



The events leading to the shooting began shortly after 4 p.m. on May 3 when a tenant who lived near Fortson in Fort Walton Beach’s Elan Apartments called the management office to say she heard what sounded like an argument coming from his apartment.

The woman, whose name has not been released, told investigators after the shooting she believed Fortson was in a relationship because she often heard a woman’s voice coming from the apartment. She said she had heard previous arguments, but none like the one that Friday afternoon.

“Before it was just, usually banter back and forth,” she told investigators. “Nothing was ever to the extent it was on (May 3).” She also thought a child was present.

 

[Renegade]

Earlier in the thread there had been some discussion over whether the officer had gone to the correct apartment.

He went to the apartment the manager said - 1401, but that was not the correct apartment, or Karen flat out lied.

Hence why I said he erred not talking to the actual complainant (Karen).

 

[cycleguy2300]

As already pointed out twice, deadly force is not justified on a threat alone. This guy was not breaking a single law. The commands to open the door had no legal authority. The officer fucked up from the get-go, by not even talking to the complainant.



No, not even remotely possible. It appeared to me he was expecting friends at the door, and was surprised to see the officer. He may or may not have heard the officer announce, if he was face-timing he might have had buds on, or perhaps he thought his friends were pranking him, But no way does he give any indication he was going to shoot anybody or expecting trouble either.



If by "similar" you mean officers shooting innocent people in their own homes (armed or unarmed) I have lost count. We had one in Dallas (open door), Ft Worth (through window), Houston (through door), Austin (shot on porch), etc. It is an epidemic.

This was an avoidable tragedy on both sides.

When he chose to hand a gun in hand, the result was predictable and justified.

You seem hung up on "threat"

"I'M GOING TO KILL YOU", with empty hands would not justify deadly force, but the presentation of a firearm, in hand is a "threat" and one that easily justifies deadly force in response.

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
If they would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
when they reasonably believe the deadly force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; (lightly edited for readability).

I can EASILY articulate, for the subject opening the door with a gun in hand response to a Deputy that loudly announced who he was, that it is reasonable to believe it was immediately necessary to use deadly force.

This shooting should really go in the fafo thread.

This wasn't answering the door withba gunnin hand to a door-to-door salesman who has no legal right to be there, this was a police officer who (as I understand) was investigating a report of possible family violence and had a DUTY to be there and may have even been able to articulate a exigent search of the residence for victims (btdt).

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

He went to the apartment the manager said - 1401, but that was not the correct apartment, or Karen flat out lied.

Hence why I said he erred not talking to the actual complainant (Karen).

yes. when he first asked she said she didn’t know what apartment it was.

 

[toddnjoyce]

This is the result of firearms training that emphasizes draw-to-first-shot times and shoot-until-down over evaluating situations. ….

I’ll respectfully disagree for a lot of reasons, but primarily due to the entirety of the OIS report that’s publicly available.

https://www.sheriff-okaloosa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/IA-2024-012-Final-Report-002-1.pdf

 

[V-Tach]

That is incorrect. The deputy was responding to a 911 call at that address/apt#.

The deputy was fired because he lied about his actions at the door to the OIS team and the lies he told demonstrated he knowingly and willfully violated departmental policies as a matter of practice.

Me still thinks he went to the wrong apartment ...........If I'm wrong so be it....

 

[cycleguy2300]

It may have been clear that he announced himself as police from outside, but that doesn’t mean it was clear from inside the apartment where the victim was, especially if he was on the phone.


And if this happens “OFTEN” then maybe that should be a clue that there’s a problem with training for police.

Or maybe use the peephole or don't open doors to unknown people...

"I didnt hear him" is a ridiculous excuse with the loudness evidenced on video and the proximity the subject was to the door at the time.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

When he chose to hand a gun in hand, the result was predictable and justified.

You seem hung up on "threat"

"I'M GOING TO KILL YOU", with empty hands would not justify deadly force, but the presentation of a firearm, in hand is a "threat" and one that easily justifies deadly force in response.

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
If they would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
when they reasonably believe the deadly force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; (lightly edited for readability).

I can EASILY articulate, for the subject opening the door with a gun in hand response to a Deputy that loudly announced who he was, that it is reasonable to believe it was immediately necessary to use deadly force.

This shooting should really go in the fafo thread.

This wasn't answering the door withba gunnin hand to a door-to-door salesman who has no legal right to be there, this was a police officer who (as I understand) was investigating a report of possible family violence and had a DUTY to be there and may have even been able to articulate a exigent search of the residence for victims (btdt).

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

So the situation changes depending on who is at the door? Wtf?!?

 

[V-Tach]

...and some think this place is an echo chamber.........

Ha!