A Milwaukee cop who was fired for killing a mentally ill homeless black man won’t be criminally charged because he acted in self-defense, the county prosecutor announced today.
The cop was dispatched to conduct a “welfare check” on a man seen sleeping in a downtown park. When the cop woke him up and tried to frisk him, the man resisted, exchanged punches with the cop, then seized the cop’s baton and hit the cop on the neck with it. The cop then shot him 14 times.
The man’s family said he suffered from schizophrenia and was off his medications when he was killed.
The incident occurred last April. The city’s police chief, after an investigation, fired cop in October for disregarding his training and violating department policy on dealing with mentally ill people. The chief said, “You don’t start frisking somebody because they appear to be mentally ill,” and criticized the cop for treating the man “like a criminal.” The shooting sparked protests locally, but hasn’t received national publicity like the Brown and Garner cases.
The Milwaukee police union condemned the firing and criticized the chief.
An ACLU spokesman acknowledge it would be a difficult case to prosecute. The prosecutor probably is bowing to reality in not trying, but maybe he should have, because a criminal conviction would prevent the shooter from working as a cop again, somewhere else. He probably won’t, though; he’s seeking disability based on PTSD. He claims the Ferguson shooting has contributed to his PTSD.
The reason I think the case is prosecutable is that the first shot, and maybe the second shot, arguably could be justified as self-defense; but I don’t see how the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th bullets the cop pumped into the man can be considered as anything but assault. They certainly weren’t necessary for officer safety.
There’s a disturbing trend all over the country for cops to turn people into Swiss cheese. I learned self-defense tactics from a police firearms expert who taught the “double tap,” i.e., two quick shots to the torso. While there’s a considerable likelihood this will kill the subject, the objective is not to produce death, but to stop the aggression. Once the subject is down, there’s no legal or moral justification to continue pumping rounds into him. That’s not kosher even in war. When the enemy is wounded, down, and disarmed, you can be court-martialed for finishing him off. Under military codes of conduct, that’s murder.
Yet, time after time, we’re seeing cops unleash fusillades of lead at suspects. Where do they get this from? Their training? If so, the training needs to be revised. But I suspect it comes from watching too many Rambo movies. Police supervisors need to get it across to beat cops that if it’s necessary to shoot someone, their job is to shoot to stop, not shoot to kill, and to stop shooting the instant the suspect no longer poses a threat. Sure, it’s harder to do it that way, but t
he sanctity of human life demands nothing less.