Pepper spray vs bullet. Bullet wins. Update: Charges dropped.

[HardToHandle]

These were from another forum, caution- it shows the shooting. I don't want to break rules so take it down if it's inappropriate.


I posted it, because it seems clear to me- guy with spray was backing away.
Shooter was engaged with him prior in some sort of altercation, got smacked in the face with an open hand, and reacted by drawing on him and then firing.

This looks TO ME, like an emotional reaction to being smacked. Not self-defense if I were on jury. And if he's not official security or PD, no justification for his action. He apparently had no authority to mess with the spray can guy.

Added- the shooter is not in any sort of uniform, just a guy in street clothing. Nothing to indicate he is anyone other than another guy in the crowd.

My understanding is the Denver City security guard requirements include a displaying visible identification in addition to registration. The shooter seems to have missed the administrative legalities as well as the criminal law elements.

Certainly there is a role for personnel protection amongst the news media. However, the news media effectively brought the shooter to the scene. Perhaps this will result in the media backing off a bit.

I am familiar with the location this shooting occurred. From other video coverage, there was a police SWAT/tactical team within 20 yards of the shooting (likely closer to 10-15 yards). Expect that will also not break in the shooter's favor.

 

[LCC]

can we call a murder a murder?

 

[scoobysnacker]

Again, idiots.

yes, both idiots.

I see nothing to justify the shooting. The spray guy was backing away and opening space, the shooter could easily have backed away too.

I see zero in the picture that tells me I need to obey the shooter- no uniform, no badge, nothing. He's a guy in the crowd, wearing Wayfarer sunglasses, a baseball cap, and an untucked shirt.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I'll wait for the autopsy and investigative reports . . .

10,000% agree about the people involved being idiots.

Since this is a self defense forum, I have a tactical question as it relates to the dynamics of the shooting as it happened, not the mental stability of the parties involved or whether they should have found better things to do that day.

The shooter has a red dot sight. He also has a WML. Pretty sure the WML has a laser. When you look at the hi-res photos on Getty taken by the Denver Post photographer, you can see the red dot from the WML laser reflected on the right lens of the dead guy's sunglasses. From the reflection of the dot, I'm guessing he got shot in the orbital socket. Just a guess.

The self defense tactical question is, the guy that got shot stepped straight back to deploy his OC. From a tactics standpoint, would he have had a better chance of surviving if he would have stepped to his right instead of straight back?

 

[Grayfox]

At this point I haven't seen anything on who started the argument, what was said or what it was about. That's going to make a difference. If the shooter started it, I'd think Murder 1 would be in order. If the victim started it, Murder 2 or maybe Manslaughter. But IMHO, the shooter was dead wrong regardless.

 

[diyj98]

I was expecting another argument about what's best for bear defense

 

[Rodan]

The self defense tactical question is, the guy that got shot stepped straight back to deploy his OC. From a tactics standpoint, would he have had a better chance of surviving if he would have stepped to his right instead of straight back?

First, I don't believe he stepped back 'to deploy his OC'. The OC was already in his right hand, held down at his side during the physical confrontation. The frame by frame clearly shows the shooter starting his drawstroke prior to the OC coming up. IMHO the victim raised the OC in response to the shooter drawing the gun. Obviously not the best response, but it was already in his hand, so that's what he went with.

To answer your question, many folks train to get off the 'X' with lateral movement. Whether that would have helped, or only delayed the result here is hard to say. The movement is intended to cause the aggressor to have to process more, and give time for 'reaction' to catch up to 'action'. I have seen it work in force on force training, but that doesn't mean it will always work.

Another point I haven't seen discussed:

The shooter obviously trains... that should be clear from speed and shot placement from concealment. What I find disturbing is that he clearly trained to a headshot from concealment, a tactic I see as a countermeasure to body armor: ie. how to engage a police officer. If this is widespread training methodology among those with the shooter's political ideology, the good guys need to be adjusting tactics.

 

[biku324]

can we call a murder a murder?

I'd say everyone involved got some of what they deserved.

 

[dr. mordo]

What I find disturbing is that he clearly trained to a headshot from concealment, a tactic I see as a countermeasure to body armor: ie. how to engage a police officer.

I certainly don't mean to defend the shooter in this scenario, but body armor is a spreading reality and criminals wear it, too. I've read several times online where folks talked about training for headshots to counter bad guys in armor.

 

[scoobysnacker]

I'd say everyone involved got some of what they deserved.

I haven't seen any other footage.

What did the guy with spray do to deserve death?

 

[Injunbro]

I haven't seen any other footage.

What did the guy with spray do to deserve death?

Whacked another guy in the head? The bear spray didn't start the confrontation & maybe slapping off the shooters hat & glasses didn't either. It all comes down to a shooting is only justified if threatened w/ bodily harm or death. What really started this whole mess?

 

[scoobysnacker]

I've since seen more footage.

The only thing I think the victim is guilty of, is poor judgement (underestimating the situation).
The more I see, the more apparent it seems that he was baited into this.

 

[scoobysnacker]

Whacked another guy in the head? The bear spray didn't start the confrontation & maybe slapping off the shooters hat & glasses didn't either. It all comes down to a shooting is only justified if threatened w/ bodily harm or death. What really started this whole mess?

They were in a group, leaving a rally. Apparently a veterans against antifa type of thing.

The shooter was claimed to be a reporter's "bodyguard", but 1, didn't have the proper authorization to officially act as that, and 2, has a pretty long history of strong leftwing stuff. Been in a number of protests, and apparently helped spread info on organizing.
The reporter and gunman followed a loud agitator (Black Guns Matter guy) around, picking conflicts with the crowd as they left. They interviewed this agitator before, there's some footage of it.

He picks a fight with a group, which includes the victim. The reporter and gunman are on the periphery, filming everything.
The victim turns away from the agitator, leaves the video, and there's a gunshot within seconds. Piecing several different videos together, it looks like this was instigated by the reporter and gunman, to at least get "dramatic footage on film"; but the gunman was all too eager to escalate rapidly. He reached for the victim, who slapped him and began to back away. The gunman drew his gun, and the victim sprayed his bear spray can as he was getting shot in the face.

There was some stuff on the news that witnesses said the agitator was talking with the reporter and gunman, immediately before this all went down.

I'd say the victim noticed the photographer and gunman filming everything and caught on to the game. Came to say something along the lines of "f--- off with this", gunman stepped in.

The victim is on another video, entering the rally earlier, and blocks the camera as he walks by. He seemed to be vigilant of being recorded, and took exception of that. But he didn't seem to attach any danger to it, which was his mistake.

 

[scoobysnacker]

One further observation;

my limited understanding is that this "video" is actually a series of still photos taken by the news photographer, in rapid succession, and not an actual video

It's uploaded to the internet as a GIF, which can be made either from video, or a series of stills. Stills could be why it's jerky, as compared to video compression during the conversion to GIF format. What we see as frames are actually individual photos (as I take it).

There's a gap, missing the draw and leveling of the gun. Goes from reaching into shirt, to gun leveled with shell already ejected in air, and slide slightly out of battery.

Maybe the news crew wanted "dramatic photos" and the camera was flying. But when shooter pulls his gun the photographer might have paused, "*** did he just pull out a gun?"; and then resumes with the gunshot.

Maybe the news crew wanted drama, but wasn't expecting this. If so, they really didn't vet their "security guy" that well.

 

[Ziggy2525]

Here's a link to the frame by frame sequence of photos that includes the two missing photos. In the article, you need to scroll down a bit for the photos.

PHOTOS: A frame by frame account of the Denver protest shooting

The fake security guard draws his weapon after being slapped, but before the guy that got shot sprays his pepper spray.

Not surprisingly, fake security guy's lawyer is saying his client saw a pistol on killed guys waist. After killed guy slapped the security guy and stepped back, the security guy thought killed guy was going for his pistol.

 

[robrossk]

Saw an interview last night with a guy that was at the rally. While he did not directly witness the actual shooting he said that the TV crew consisted of 4-5 people - the shooter, an agitator, cameraman, producer?, reporter. Further, he said the TV group would move off to the side and huddle periodically, and then the agitator would move out into the crowd followed closely by the shooter and the others. Like most here have said, it was a bad situation to be in. My guess is that when the chips fall shooter will go to jail for a long time, and the other part of the "crew" may have some culpability, and the family of the deceased will end up with a LOT of money from the TV station and company that hired/employed the shooter (if any).

 

[stansdds]

As more of the story emerges, I am coming to the conclusion that the TV crew was trying to instigate an aggressive encounter in order to be "first on the scene". I think they succeeded, but with a lethal outcome. If this hypothesis turns out to be correct, the TV crew needs to be charged with conspiracy and as accessories to the murder. *


* I am not an attorney nor spokesperson for an attorney or legal firm.

 

[Ziggy2525]

I saw this mentioned on another forum and wanted to check it for myself. This image is from the photo at the moment of the head slap. I cropped it, lightened it, and sharpened it to bring out the image.

It looks like the guy that got shot could be carrying an FDE pistol in a shoulder holster or vest pocket. It looks like the fake security guard is trying to grab his pistol when the guy that got shot slaps him.

 

[sigp220.45]

I'd say this shot is important. Pepper guy points spray at photographer up close, Not-a-Pinkerton steps in, reaches for spray, gets slapped, shoots pepper man in the face.

Note 6 second gap between this shot and next one.

What a mess.

 

[Rodan]

The victim had a handgun in a shoulder holster on his left side, and it appears the shooter was reaching for that or the pepper spray when slapped. In either case, the shooter made physical contact with the victim (with no lawful authority to do so) and that resulted in the slap.

It's becoming more and more clear that at least four people were involved (shooter, reporter, agitator and photographer) in an organized operation intended to create news by instigating a confrontation and filming the result. I sincerely hope the Denver PD is pursuing a thorough investigation.

From a personal defense standpoint, it's apparent that attending these type of events is extremely dangerous and you shouldn't make any assumption about where the threat is coming from. This was a pro-police rally, and the police were only yards away from where this occurred.

We can criticize the victim in this, but who would have expected to by murdered by 'the Press'?

Be careful folks. The rules we play by are not being observed by the other team.

 

[tops]

Very, very good advice from a lawyer and I liked the price. Larry

 

[Muss Muggins]

We never solved the shooting in this thread, and we ain't gonna solve this 'un either . . .

A case of self defense or not (long) - Sadly update in Post #36.

Still the best opinion out there by a prosecutor:

"The criminal code does not fit well in mass chaos . . . "

 

[dockmurgw]

So far there is only one indisputable fact: The 2A also applies to the shallow end of the gene pool, and these acts do nothing but fuel the politicians determined to stop it by the only means available to them...gun controls. I really could care less about who slapped who, who did what first, etc. All I know is that both of these knuckleheads will be the poster children for the next anti gun initiative...and that ticks me off in a way I cant explain here since it would get me banned.

 

[biku324]

I haven't seen any other footage.

What did the guy with spray do to deserve death?

He violated the 'don't be stupid' clause of the law of life. He went to an emotionally charged protest carrying chemical spray and a pistol, then got into an angry exchange at arm's length with another armed guy. The other armed guy did the same, and is in jail, so his just desserts are coming. Bad judgement in all of life, including teasing venomous snakes, texting while driving, smoking in a grain elevator, etc., often carries a quick, unexpected death sentence.

Tough excrement to hotheads with guns. Idiots.

 

[scoobysnacker]

He violated the 'don't be stupid' clause of the law of life. He went to an emotionally charged protest carrying chemical spray and a pistol, then got into an angry exchange at arm's length with another armed guy. The other armed guy did the same, and is in jail, so his just desserts are coming. Bad judgement in all of life, including teasing venomous snakes, texting while driving, smoking in a grain elevator, etc., often carries a quick, unexpected death sentence.

Tough excrement to hotheads with guns. Idiots.

I see where you are coming from, but I'm going to disagree on the "deserving" part for the victim.

This was a "pro-" rally for him, he wasn't going to an "anti-" rally to SEEK confrontation with a group.
Like the guy on the news said last night (John Tiegen), this was a group of vets wanting to counter the presence of BLM/Antifa, and apparently the event itself was peaceful (haven't heard anything to the contrary, which surely would have been on the news by now).
The event was over, and he was in a group leaving the event, returning to their cars. Like fans leaving a stadium after a game.

His group was accosted by a small group (gunman, agitator, and media) for the sole purpose of provoking conflict. There are other videos, the agitator is screaming and cursing, and threatening and posturing. And the media members are right there, getting closeups of that. Also consider, this small group has multiple social media evidence that indicates they aren't "neutral", that the gunman and the media involved are strongly sympathetic to the "other side", and opposed to the group the victim was with.

They were attempting to provoke conflict for the sole purpose of creating it. Moments before the shooting the agitator was shouting "f--- around and find out", and he even looked in the gunman's direction as he said it.
They succeeded in angering this man, he responded towards the other members of the group in a non-lethal way, and he was shot and killed.

His "stupid actions"; I suppose you can include him going to a rally, but come on now. There are multiple "rallies" going on around the country, shouting hate towards the government and police, devolving into riots and looting. That side's consequences are commercials advertising their side on NFL games etc.
The other side wants to show they are present too, that not everyone wants total lawlessness and chaos. It might seem a high risk situation, but sometimes people think there are causes worth supporting.

I absolutely agree that walking around with pepper spray was stupid. Not only was it unnecessarily drawing attention, for practical purposes, it was ineffective (as illustrated by the outcome).
It showed he lacked the awareness of what he was facing. I think we all can learn from that, and process it...

He approached the media, thinking they were either neutral in position, or that the opposing side would not use deadly force. He was wrong. We should take away- do not engage anyone without seeing them as potentially hostile, even if they're wearing a "press" jacket. Because that's his move, and it got him killed.

 

[stansdds]

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

 

[biku324]

I see where you are coming from, but I'm going to disagree on the "deserving" part for the victim.

This was a "pro-" rally for him, he wasn't going to an "anti-" rally to SEEK confrontation with a group.
Like the guy on the news said last night (John Tiegen), this was a group of vets wanting to counter the presence of BLM/Antifa, and apparently the event itself was peaceful (haven't heard anything to the contrary, which surely would have been on the news by now).
The event was over, and he was in a group leaving the event, returning to their cars. Like fans leaving a stadium after a game.

His group was accosted by a small group (gunman, agitator, and media) for the sole purpose of provoking conflict. There are other videos, the agitator is screaming and cursing, and threatening and posturing. And the media members are right there, getting closeups of that. Also consider, this small group has multiple social media evidence that indicates they aren't "neutral", that the gunman and the media involved are strongly sympathetic to the "other side", and opposed to the group the victim was with.

They were attempting to provoke conflict for the sole purpose of creating it. Moments before the shooting the agitator was shouting "f--- around and find out", and he even looked in the gunman's direction as he said it.
They succeeded in angering this man, he responded towards the other members of the group in a non-lethal way, and he was shot and killed.

His "stupid actions"; I suppose you can include him going to a rally, but come on now. There are multiple "rallies" going on around the country, shouting hate towards the government and police, devolving into riots and looting. That side's consequences are commercials advertising their side on NFL games etc.
The other side wants to show they are present too, that not everyone wants total lawlessness and chaos. It might seem a high risk situation, but sometimes people think there are causes worth supporting.

I absolutely agree that walking around with pepper spray was stupid. Not only was it unnecessarily drawing attention, for practical purposes, it was ineffective (as illustrated by the outcome).
It showed he lacked the awareness of what he was facing. I think we all can learn from that, and process it...

He approached the media, thinking they were either neutral in position, or that the opposing side would not use deadly force. He was wrong. We should take away- do not engage anyone without seeing them as potentially hostile, even if they're wearing a "press" jacket. Because that's his move, and it got him killed.

Pepper spray and a concealed handgun. If someone is trying to provoke, walk away. It's really that simple.

We're all making choices.

 

[Injunbro]

It seems there were a bunch of mistakes made:
1. Don't take pictures of people w/out permission.
2. Don't wave pepper spray around, like a gun don't draw it until you need it.
3. Don't play bodyguard unless you're prepared to face the consequences.
4. Don't touch people you aren't friends w/.
5. If you hit/slap/punch/push/strike others be prepared for them to defend themselves.
Conclusion: If you get involved in stupid activities w/ stupid people stupid things will happen & no one will like the results.

 

[Protected One]

I see where you are coming from, but I'm going to disagree on the "deserving" part for the victim.

This was a "pro-" rally for him, he wasn't going to an "anti-" rally to SEEK confrontation with a group.
Like the guy on the news said last night (John Tiegen), this was a group of vets wanting to counter the presence of BLM/Antifa, and apparently the event itself was peaceful (haven't heard anything to the contrary, which surely would have been on the news by now).
The event was over, and he was in a group leaving the event, returning to their cars. Like fans leaving a stadium after a game.

His group was accosted by a small group (gunman, agitator, and media) for the sole purpose of provoking conflict. There are other videos, the agitator is screaming and cursing, and threatening and posturing. And the media members are right there, getting closeups of that. Also consider, this small group has multiple social media evidence that indicates they aren't "neutral", that the gunman and the media involved are strongly sympathetic to the "other side", and opposed to the group the victim was with.

They were attempting to provoke conflict for the sole purpose of creating it. Moments before the shooting the agitator was shouting "f--- around and find out", and he even looked in the gunman's direction as he said it.
They succeeded in angering this man, he responded towards the other members of the group in a non-lethal way, and he was shot and killed.

His "stupid actions"; I suppose you can include him going to a rally, but come on now. There are multiple "rallies" going on around the country, shouting hate towards the government and police, devolving into riots and looting. That side's consequences are commercials advertising their side on NFL games etc.
The other side wants to show they are present too, that not everyone wants total lawlessness and chaos. It might seem a high risk situation, but sometimes people think there are causes worth supporting.

I absolutely agree that walking around with pepper spray was stupid. Not only was it unnecessarily drawing attention, for practical purposes, it was ineffective (as illustrated by the outcome).
It showed he lacked the awareness of what he was facing. I think we all can learn from that, and process it...

He approached the media, thinking they were either neutral in position, or that the opposing side would not use deadly force. He was wrong. We should take away- do not engage anyone without seeing them as potentially hostile, even if they're wearing a "press" jacket. Because that's his move, and it got him killed.

Well. he "countered the presence of blm/antifa"....and it cost him his life.

 

[scoobysnacker]

The victim had a handgun in a shoulder holster on his left side, and it appears the shooter was reaching for that or the pepper spray when slapped. In either case, the shooter made physical contact with the victim (with no lawful authority to do so) and that resulted in the slap.

It's becoming more and more clear that at least four people were involved (shooter, reporter, agitator and photographer) in an organized operation intended to create news by instigating a confrontation and filming the result. I sincerely hope the Denver PD is pursuing a thorough investigation.

From a personal defense standpoint, it's apparent that attending these type of events is extremely dangerous and you shouldn't make any assumption about where the threat is coming from. This was a pro-police rally, and the police were only yards away from where this occurred.

We can criticize the victim in this, but who would have expected to by murdered by 'the Press'?

Be careful folks. The rules we play by are not being observed by the other team.

This.

I get that the victim made a lot of tactical mistakes. Don't roll around with pepper spray in your hand, attracting unwanted attention.
If someone reaches for your gun, that's the moment you need to also.
Don't assume you are safe because you are with others, and/or at an event you support.

I know a lot say "don't be out there". I get that, I don't want to go out into something like that. But heck, things like that are springing up all over, and most are NOT friendly to the average poster here (let's leave it at that).