Deputies Shoot Teen in San Bernadino who was following instructions

[MechAg94]

Teen, reported kidnapped, was killed by deputies as she followed instructions, video shows

Savannah Graziano, a 15-year-old who was abducted by her father in September 2022, was shot and killed by law enforcement even as she followed a deputy’s instructions to walk toward them on the side of a California highway, according to newly released video and audio.
The video, obtained through a California Public Records Act request by an independent journalist, contradicts statements made by the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department in the aftermath of the shooting that Savannah had fired shots at deputies before her death.

Savannah was shot by deputies who had a different view of the truck, according to the Sheriff’s Department. The department did not provide the names of deputies involved in the shooting but said they were at a distance and on a higher elevation than where the truck ultimately stopped. Those deputies shot at her because they saw a person get out of the truck and walk toward the nearest deputy, unaware he was calling to her, according to authorities.

The article makes it sounds like deputies were just shooting at everyone who was not a cop without really know what was going on.  I am a bit surprised they didn't hit other deputies. 

[zxcvbob]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/01/california-police-video-shooting-15-year-old-girl-savannah-graziano

[griz]

I can understand that in a chaotic situation where the cops are being shot at, they might shoot the wrong person.  Not saying they're right, but I can understand that mistake.  I can't understand why they would lie and coverup their mistake for over a year.  That should be a career ending move.  Not the shooter, the people that lied.

[MechAg94]

Yeah, lying seems to be an accepted strategy across our govt there are rarely consequences for it. 

I heard someone mention the girl had body armor on.  Look at the video again, she probably did and she was moving toward the officer almost at a run.  It looks like there was very poor communication between the cops to communicate the girl might be giving up.  Also, the cops that apparently shot her were dang close to shooting directly at the officer trying to get her to give up.

[dogmush]

One of the things that makes me really angry is that US cops want to play military but don't actually learn military tactics or procedures, then end up *expletive deleted*ing up.  The lying about the *expletive deleted*ck up just adds to it.

When you have multiple friendlies in CQB range like that, the mid range weapons disengage.  Unless that guy was designated overwatch, he should have disengaged and let the guys up close to the hectic CQB fight handle it.  If he was designated overwatch, his job was to be watching their backs. The deputies talking to that girl from the car clearly had eyes on her and were dealing with that threat.  Overwatch should have been on the truck (where they knew they had someone else)

If cops want to play infantry, they need to be held to training and behavior standards for that role.  If they don't want to learn and train on proper techniques, then they need to stop playing mil-sim with live rounds.

Dipshit that took a mid range shot on a target without PID, towards friendlies, should be at minumum fired, and ideally charged.  I've said several times that the ROE we had in Iraq is stricter than what cops have in US cities. 

[dogmush]

I can understand that in a chaotic situation where the cops are being shot at, they might shoot the wrong person.  Not saying they're right, but I can understand that mistake.  I can't understand why they would lie and coverup their mistake for over a year.  That should be a career ending move.  Not the shooter, the people that lied.

I'm wanted to address this as well, specifically, because I think this kind of "I can understand fatal mistakes" leads us to where we are with poicing today.

First:  "Know your target and what's behind it", or for the more military inclined: Do not engage without PID.  The firearms safety rules don't go out the window on a two way range, they become MORE vital.  If you can't handle the basics of engagement then you should not engage in firefights in public.  I said the same thing about the SGT who popped a couple rounds into her partners car just because he mag dumped the acorn.  She did not have a target, she should not have shot.

Second: the cop that shot this girl was NOT being shot at.  He was posted up on a small rise a bit away.  Other cops had been shot at previously, sure, but this dipshit wasn't taking fire, and there's no report that he had taken any fire, so no, he doesn't get the benifit of the doubt on shootng the wrong person.  He murdered a 15 YO Girl because he was too hyped up and untrained to follow the basic rules of a gunfight.  That's not "understandable".

[cordex]

Dipshit that took a mid range shot on a target without PID, towards friendlies, should be at minumum fired, and ideally charged.

If we're using the military as our exemplar, maybe the police department should lie until they're caught and eventually settle for loss of rank and a pay cut for the killers?

I've said several times that the ROE we had in Iraq is stricter than what cops have in US cities. 

If a similar scenario had played out in Iraq she almost certainly would have been killed there too, and it is unlikely that the killer would have been imprisoned over it.

The US military killed an awful lot of noncombatant civilians - accidentally and intentionally - during the Iraq conflict.  There weren't a ton of soldiers, sailors, or airmen imprisoned for killing innocent Iraqi civilians, either.

I know none of us would ever make a mistake in what was probably the first shootout of our lives, but it is important to remember some people are actually fallible humans, and situations can happen where the innocent girl is the one getting out of a vehicle during a two-way gunfight while wearing body armor and running at a cop.

[dogmush]

I'M not saying we should use the military as our exemplar, US Law Enforcement has chosen to do so.  I'm just saying that they are failing to live up to their chosen exemplar.

If a similar scenario had played out in Iraq she almost certainly would have been killed there too, and it is unlikely that the killer would have been imprisoned over it.

Maybe, maybe not.  If this situation had played out in Iraq, it would have been understood that the two deputies at the SUV (that were telling her to come to them) had responsibility for that target, and the farther away person probably wouldn't have taken the shot.  That said, we also probably would have lit up the truck with a 240 while it was moving and someone was shooting at us.  I would actually have a little more sympathy if she had taken a stray round while engaging a vehicle that someone was shooting from.  My issue is the cops took all the cool guy toys including patrol carbines, but failed to get the basic cool guy training on how to use them on a two way range, and they keep shooting the wrong people.

I know none of us would ever make a mistake in what was probably the first shootout of our lives, but it is important to remember some people are actually fallible humans, and situations can happen where the innocent girl is the one getting out of a vehicle during a two-way gunfight while wearing body armor and running at a cop.

Sure, and most of us that make a mistake (or not) in the first gunfight of our lives get to explain that innocent death to a jury and have the reasonableness judged.  (Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, That dude from Austin, etc, etc)  We don't even know the shooter's name here. 
It bears repeating again that while she was running at a cop, she was not running at the cop that shot her.  The cop she was running at didn't think she was a threat, and the one that shot her wasn't being threatened.

[dogmush]

I should point out that one of the major issues I have with current US Law Enforcement is the tacit assumption that they should not take a risk even if they kill an innocent person, and the acceptance of that assumption.  1* and all that *expletive deleted*it.

LEOs are empowered by the people to use force against people that, by definition, have not been convicted of the crime yet.  I understand there are bad people in the world, thats why we give cops body armor, lots of buddies, radios, guns, all sorts of stuff to help them out.  The flip side of that agreement is if you need a half a sec or even a full sec or to to make damn sure that you are using force against a real threat, and not someone running to your buddy, holding a cell phone, sitting in a car after having called the cops in the first place, or whatever, then they damn well better take that sec to be damn sure the person they are using the force of .gov against is actually threatening them or someone else.  If a cop is unwilling or unable to commit to taking that risk, they should find something else to do IMNSHO.  Blackwater is hiring, as are the ship security teams that take out pirates.  Those are both a better fit.

[cordex]

I'M not saying we should use the military as our exemplar, US Law Enforcement has chosen to do so.  I'm just saying that they are failing to live up to their chosen exemplar.

Not a lot of US military members imprisoned for causing thousands of dead noncombatant Iraqis.  Even in cases where unarmed civilian families trying to surrender were gunned down, it was often shrugged off until it couldn't be, and then resulted in demotion not prison.

My issue is the cops took all the cool guy toys including patrol carbines, but failed to get the basic cool guy training on how to use them on a two way range, and they keep shooting the wrong people.

You've got sort of ambivalent view of AR-15s.  In some threads you like to point out that it is just a normal, average, everyday rifle, the standard and commonly used weapon for US civilians.  When it comes to cops, now it is a "cool guy toy" that should require military training?

Over the same period, US cops killed only a tiny fraction of the innocent people than did US soldiers in Iraq.  So much for the exceptionalism of the cool guy training when it comes to preserving innocent life.

I'd further note that there are also regularly cases of innocent people shot by civilians who never end up facing charges because it fails the same kind of objective reasonableness standard that would apply here.  In retrospect it was wrong, but given the information available at the time, a theoretical reasonable person would have had good reasons to do the same thing.

It bears repeating again that while she was running at a cop, she was not running at the cop that shot her.  The cop she was running at didn't think she was a threat, and the one that shot her wasn't being threatened.

Very true, but defense of others can be a legitimate application of lethal force.

The cop screwed up.  He killed the very innocent girl that he was trying to save.  No question that it was a bad shoot.  Circumstances were such that it is somewhat understandable how he made the mistake that he did.  Just as it was at times understandable why Pvt. Snuffy lit up unarmed civilians.

In defense of your claim that military training would keep cops from killing innocent people, the acorn drill didn't kill anyone, so there is that.

[dogmush]

You've got sort of ambivalent view of AR-15s.  In some threads you like to point out that it is just a normal, average, everyday rifle, the standard and commonly used weapon for US civilians.  When it comes to cops, now it is a "cool guy toy" that should require military training?

Dogmush's other pet peeve:  Remind me again which model of M4 the citizen's of San Bernardino county can go get? and which magazines they can put in them? 

Over the same period, US cops killed only a tiny fraction of the innocent people than did US soldiers in Iraq.  So much for the exceptionalism of the cool guy training when it comes to preserving innocent life.

US Cops got into far less gunfights too.  As I've said on here plenty, I'm not a pointy end of the spear kinda guy, but I did manage to get into Iraq for two trips, I would have gotten in trouble for taking the shot that cop did.  Even if it were only a demotion or Article 15 NJP, it seems like that's more than it's reported this Officer got.  Maybe he got more that hasn't been reported.  Also: going back to explicitly state the implied tone of my first post:  The cops in the US shoud be operating on STRICTER ROE and consequences than we did in Iraq, as CA is not an active war zone.  Your point that soldiers in a war zone might get away with more is taken, but they should because they are in a WAR ZONE, in active conflict.  Not policing civilians.  My point is that even in a war zone the ROE we had would look askance at this.  Even if we (soldiers) wouldn't get tried and imprisoned, I'm concerned that the [apparent because I haven't seen the Sheriff's] ROE and tactics would run afoul of a war zones ROE.

The cop screwed up.  He killed the very innocent girl that he was trying to save.  No question that it was a bad shoot.  Circumstances were such that it is somewhat understandable how he made the mistake that he did.  Just as it was at times understandable why Pvt. Snuffy lit up unarmed civilians.

What are the consequence of that?  Is he still carrying a gun and allowed to use deadly force on civilians?  Why should I be OK with that considering his demonstrated poor judgement using deadly force on civilians?

[dogmush]

You've got sort of ambivalent view of AR-15s.  In some threads you like to point out that it is just a normal, average, everyday rifle, the standard and commonly used weapon for US civilians.  When it comes to cops, now it is a "cool guy toy" that should require military training?

To clear up any incosistancy in my feelings on this point of cordex's:

A civilian in the US has the right to bear arms.  They should be able to bear any kind of military sidearm they desire, with the understanding that that also comes with an implied duty to stand against tyranny, and an explicit responsibility for anything they do with that weapon.  This includes people employed by the government while on their own time.

An agent of the government, when carrying a weapon as part of their mandate to use the force of government against The People, needs to justify why they need the level of weaponry they are using, needs to be trained to a high standard, and held accountable for their use of that weapon.  These requirements should be stricter than just bearing arms as a member of The People, because Government Agents are empowered to use the government's monopoly on force against The People, and that power comes with more responsibility and necessary restrictions to prevent it's abuse.

[cordex]

Dogmush's other pet peeve:  Remind me again which model of M4 the citizen's of San Bernardino county can go get? and which magazines they can put in them? 

Totally fair point, although I don't believe your response was in any respect dependent on this being a California cop. 

As far as the righteous indignation, I get it.  You're not wrong.  Police need to be held to a high standard, and they should be punished when they screw up. 

But also, *expletive deleted*it happens in bizarre, outlier shootouts like this.  Doesn't mean we shouldn't want improvement and justice.  I spent four years in a position where I could help with that.

That said, the outrage seems a little selective. As I recall, your wife works in a field that kills at least a quarter million innocent Americans every year - possibly closer to half a million.  It would be interesting if you are dismissive of those deaths when you are so uncompromising about when police accidentally kill innocent people.

[dogmush]

That said, the outrage seems a little selective. As I recall, your wife works in a field that kills at least a quarter million innocent Americans every year - possibly closer to half a million.  It would be interesting if you are dismissive of those deaths when you are so uncompromising about when police accidentally kill innocent people.

Valid.

Partially, I think that comes from my skillset being more "gunfight" based, so I am better able to pick out BS being floated as justification.  Whereas Malpractice isn't my wheelhouse so I am more likely to take the justification of someone who's wheelhouse it is.  Not that that means the Malpractice justification isn't BS, just I am unable to recognize it.

I do tend to be pretty critical of Dr's and Nurses that cross the threshold into "dogmush detectable BS" but that's not something we normally discuss on here.  FWIW, Mrs. Mush no longer treats paitents, but leads the clinical education department where she works, and will absolutely crucify nurses she feels were careless and/or negligent.  At least in conversation, and during retraining.  She has no control over things like licensure.  Ironically she's much more likely to take the word of police spokesman in shooting incidents, even when video shows negligence.

Everyone has their lane, I guess.

[MillCreek]

Malpractice!  That is my wheelhouse!

https://healthjournalism.org/blog/2023/07/medical-errors-are-the-third-leading-cause-of-death-and-other-statistics-you-should-question/

And tell Mrs. Mush that I said hello!  Speaking as the guy who has to explain what and why my nurses did what they did, we could probably tell each other stories.

[cordex]

Thanks for the fact check, MillCreek.  Even at an order of magnitude fewer preventable medical malpractice deaths as suggested by that article, doctors kill a hell of a lot more innocent people than cops do by more than an order of magnitude.

[MillCreek]

Thanks for the fact check, MillCreek.  Even at an order of magnitude fewer preventable medical malpractice deaths as suggested by that article, doctors kill a hell of a lot more innocent people than cops do by more than an order of magnitude.

No doubt.

[MechAg94]

The problem I see that is getting worse with shoots like this (may not getting worse) is that is has become the exception for a police shooter to be punished.  The norm is for an internal investigation that says everyone did okay and everything is swept under the rug.  At least it seems that way to me in the public. 

[Hawkmoon]

I should point out that one of the major issues I have with current US Law Enforcement is the tacit assumption that they should not take a risk even if they kill an innocent person, and the acceptance of that assumption.  1* and all that *expletive deleted*it.

LEOs are empowered by the people to use force against people that, by definition, have not been convicted of the crime yet.  I understand there are bad people in the world, thats why we give cops body armor, lots of buddies, radios, guns, all sorts of stuff to help them out.  The flip side of that agreement is if you need a half a sec or even a full sec or to to make damn sure that you are using force against a real threat, and not someone running to your buddy, holding a cell phone, sitting in a car after having called the cops in the first place, or whatever, then they damn well better take that sec to be damn sure the person they are using the force of .gov against is actually threatening them or someone else.  If a cop is unwilling or unable to commit to taking that risk, they should find something else to do IMNSHO.  Blackwater is hiring, as are the ship security teams that take out pirates.  Those are both a better fit.

Well said.

As the late Ann Landers used to say, "If you can't stand the heat -- get out of the kitchen."