Trooper fired only shots in confrontation with Fairbanks driver, spokeswoman says
13 days ago | 4807 views | 48 
| 28 
| 
| 
| 28 | |
The trooper shot the man following a traffic stop at 8:22 p.m. near the Tanana River levee on Peger Road. Neither the name of the trooper nor the wounded man have been released. No arrests had been made by Saturday afternoon.
AST spokeswoman Megan Peters said early reports that the trooper was fired upon by the suspect were incorrect. Troopers released that information in the hours after the incident, but Peters said the trooper actually fired because the driver of the vehicle attempted to run him over.
Peters attributed the mix-up to confusion at a chaotic crime scene that made its way into an official statement before it could be corrected.
Troopers weren’t releasing many specific details about the incident on Saturday, citing an ongoing investigation.
A press release from Alaska State Troopers said that the suspect was driving a 2007 Suburban on Van Horn Road and failed to yield, resulting in pursuit by the trooper. That pursuit ultimately resulted in the trooper shooting the suspect, who was transported to Fairbanks Memorial Hospital for treatment.
Peters said she couldn’t confirm how many times the suspect was shot or the nature of his injuries. The press release said it appeared the suspect would likely recover at the time of transport, but Peters said she was unable to provide an update on the man’s condition, citing patient confidentiality.
Peters said it isn’t unusual for authorities to wait before arresting a suspect who is hospitalized. It gives troopers more time to investigate an incident. Authorities are also responsible for medical bills if someone is arrested while they’re being treated.
Peters said the suspect is not considered a flight risk.
There was also a passenger in the suspect’s vehicle, but that person was not injured and had not been arrested by early Saturday afternoon.
“I don’t know if that person is suspected of anything or is going to be charged with anything,” Peters said.
Under Department of Public Safety policy, the name of the trooper involved is being withheld for three business days while the incident is under investigation. The Alaska Bureau of Investigation is looking into the incident, which is standard procedure when a trooper is involved in a shooting.
Contact staff writer Jeff Richardson at 459-7518.
One of the reasons I read the comments section is to hear what other people have to say or contribute about the news.
No one is forcing you to read comments you don't want to read. If you don't want to read em', just skip 'em... just like the rest of us.
Sheesh.
If Leo behavior makes them a threat to the public safety, then something urgently needs to be done to control LEO/LE Dept behavior. Excessive LEO power[use of force] is always a threat to a free society. And when LEOs are not held to rigorous, *factual* accountablity, it inevitably leads to [some] LEO's misuse of their extra-ordinary powers.
This IS the present situation, with previous ABI investigations of LEO killings.
I would not want to see LEOs disarmed. Clean, decent LE is an important function for the benefit of the public/society, and we sometimes need them to go into/deal with dangerous situations. They need to be able to protect themselves, each other, and the public. So we grant them the power to be armed, and to use deadly force when, WHEN there is a *real* and *immediate* threat to them or the public of very serious bodily harm or loss of life, that can not, *CAN NOT* be avoided or dealt with in any other way.
And because we grant them the use of such extraordinary force, we expect/*trust* that they will be sufficiently trained, and will exercise sufficient judgement and self control, not to misuse that deadly force [or other extra-ordinary LE powers] when it is not absolutely necessary toprotect life, and most especially not for the purpose of enforcing the 'ego-gratification' of power/control over free citizens.
Where was the absolute need, the threat of serious bodily harm, or death, in an individual who "did not yield"?? What would justify the use of deadly force? Troopers have acknowledged there was no gunshots from the vehicle. The vehicle was not stopped [possibly didn't even realize they were beinging asked to stop, or even see the LEO?]. If the LEO's bullets hit the side of the vehicle, then the LEO shot as it was passing him, not as it was coming towards him.
Engaging in actions[s] that have a high probablity of resulting in the death or serious bodily harm of a [presumed innocent] citizen/civilian, is simply not acceptable behavior for a "Public Safety Officer", when there is not clear, immediate, and unavoidable threat to his, or the public's, life.
I would like to be able to expect a clear, honest, factual account, without bias, of what happened, from the subsequent investigation. Unfortunately, experience has shown me that the public is more likely to receive a 'packet' of justifications for the LEO's behavior, many of which will not 'wash' when exposed to a factual account of the actual circumstances. {Ref: Corwin Vent and many other LEO killings 'investigated' by ABI}
I would like to believe [trust] that they would remove an officer who unjustifiably threatened the life,and caused serious bodily harm, to a citizen, without real and immediate cause, and that the LEO would receive penalties commenserate with the harm he did to both the individual, and the public trust, but experience has shown this is unlikely.
I'll wait and see. Perhaps I will be wrong, this time. I hope so. And I hope the individual who was shot recovers without lasting physical disability.
That officer should have faced criminal charges.
Yes it is a dumb thing to do but is it worth a life?
Lost-for you to state that there is no "slant" in your thinking from a life style or experience is ignorant.
You have made many outrageous and unbelievable comments on here but even you can't seriously think your life experiences do not shape your opinions and beliefs.
This must be something you're more familiar with me, I don't think in those terms.
Stereotyping is the recourse of people with no real argument.
Once you have made contact with the law, regardless of how, you lose the ability to look at a situation without that old LEO slant or criminal slant or family of a loved one accused and harassed slant.. or whatever your original slant was...
If you didn't take this so personal you would be able to look and admit it looks and smells bad.
If this story were told to you in your former life you would have held this against the "perp" in a court of law! You would have held them up as the liar they OBVIOUSLY must be right? Only cops get to be confused and send out misinformation in a moment of duress.. what do they call that charge? Giving false information to a LEO???? You know the one....
Incomplete information, changing stories, no names .. weird is that normal for them not to name the "criminal/victim"?
Maybe I never noticed that before.. I thought when they killed or shot someone only the Trooper was protected from immediate identification....
So let's disarm all troopers and take away their code lights. Punish them for "harassing" drunk/dangerous drivers, much less people with expired tags, insurance, etc. let's just make them "security Guards"?
...all because a few "rogues" don't think the rules should apply to them, right. Pathetic.
"mah rahts arr beein violayted! quick- make a law!"
Who among you can tell a person when they should or should not fear for their life? Do any of you have any idea the amount of WORK involved after an officer fires his weapon? Well they don't just blow the smoke out of the end of their barrel and holster it like a gunslinger, in other words it's not something ANY officer does as rashly or compulsively as they do in the movies or television, which, from what I've read here- is probably where most of you which-hunters attained your "knowledge" on Law Enforcement.
It's not that the Justice system is necessarily corrupt, just takes the Troopers.
Though the DA can theoretically file charges based on citizen complaint, I rarely hear of them doing so [never - in FBK].
They rely on the Troopers [or other LE Depts] to do the investigative work and provide evidence to support a case. So if the Troopers decide to stonewall, 'lose' existing evidence, lean on witnesses, lie, . . ., the DA has no case.
A case in point is Dan Scott, Ak Trooper. Reported for rape [on duty] while stationed in Fbk. Trooper investigation cleared him. Troopers transfered him several times to progressively more remote postings. He wound up in Aniak [I think it was] where over several years he engaged in a series of sexual assaults. Victims reported to the Trooper post. No action/investigation/collection of evidence, etc occured. He was not disciplined or removed. Finally, in desparation the victims in the village filed a civil suit against the State. Special Prosecutions/Sexual Crimes moved to charge Scott, but somehow the Troopers could not find any evidence to support charges. [This might have been partially because, while stationed in Fbk, Scott probably had participated in other [sexual] crimes, about which he might have been willing to talk, in his outrage that he was being charged at all]
So, this serial sexual offender, who committed his offenses on duty, in uniform, was bargained out with just 3 1/2 yrs. There were 3-4 victims from that one village willing to testify. Who knows how many previous victims at his past postings might have been willing, had a real investigation been conducted.
http://www.ktva.com/ci_13738601?source=most_viewed
This is the 3rd version of the story from the Troopers - that is so fun.
1) The KTVA video clip says Trooper shot motorist because motorist wouldn't stop.
2) Previous Trooper story was that Trooper shot motorist after motorist stopped, and then tried to run over cop with his car (Newsminer and Anchorage Daily News)
3). Trooper story before that was that cop shot motorist because motorist was shooting at him. Later it was determined that only the Trooper fired shots. (Newsminer)
Troopers can't seem to get it together to fabricate a workable lie here. I still don't think they have a story that works. I hope there will be a 4th and a 5th story - that would be fun. How many Alaska State Troopers does it take to fabricate a believable story about why they gunned down a motorist? Can they do it? WOW - these Troopers are not only evil they are DUMB !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Funny part is . . . they may get away with it. "Justice system" is corrupt. It would be funny if it wasn't so tragic for America. Look what we've become.
But they didn't in the past either, when I was inexperienced and foolish enough to actually believe that they were primarily interested in LE and Public Safety. I speak of the agency as a whole, and the manner/nature of the command, because, as I've said many times before, there are lots of decent Troopers in the ranks.