CO - Jessica Hernandez, 17, killed by police after LEO struck by stolen car

[Yoda]

Yes that's right, I am asking about probable cause. Was the reason for running plates because 911 call or because a car full of teenagers. And does it matter? Was there a BOLO for the car? When was it determined car was stolen? Was car a strangers or family/friend?
Too many questions in this case to form an opinion. IMO

Posted up thread MSM reported that a call was received for loud noise coming from alley. LE ran plates, found out it was stolen, called for back up.

 

[Yoda]

Yes that's right, I am asking about probable cause. Was the reason for running plates because 911 call or because a car full of teenagers. And does it matter? Was there a BOLO for the car? When was it determined car was stolen? Was car a strangers or family/friend?
Too many questions in this case to form an opinion. IMO

Posted up thread MSM reported that a call was received for loud noise coming from alley. LE ran plates, found out it was stolen, called for back up.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/01/27/police-shoot-denver-teen-who-struck-officers-with-stolen-car/

 

[Fred Hall]

Did LEOs move her from inside car to beside car, then EMTs moved her to alley end/mouth,
then left her in place there for a bit -where vid was made?
Or did LEOs move her from inside car, all the way, 100 feet, to alley end/mouth, left her there to wait for EMTs?

sbm,bbm

Thinking further, I find it unlikely that EMTs would load a casualty onto a stretcher and carry them some distance only to then place the stretcher on the ground and wander off. If there were any EMTs on the scene, I think they would be have been seen surrounding the wounded driver.

 

[al66pine]

View attachment 71893
Note that the blurred rectangle does not just cover the body lying on the ground — it has been extended upwards in order to obscure what I'm guessing is an officer leaning over the body. Why was he blurred out? Are they trying to conceal what the officer is doing?

bbm
Subsequent Fred Hall post:
"The blur box can be seen to spill over the edge of the smart-phone. This suggests that it was applied by the TV station."

If TV staff applied blur box, what did they want to conceal -
- ID of person shot?
- ID of LEO?
- LEO's actions wrt person shot?
- both?
- other? If so what?

Why?
- privacy of person shot, general principle?
- privacy of person shot, bloody & injured or partially unclothed?
- prevent family from learning of casualty or fatality from TV broadcast?
- conspiracy w LE to conceal LEO's actions, before or after shooting?
- combo of above?
- other? If so, what?

Anyone? Thx in adv.

 

[Fred Hall]

bbm
Subsequent Fred Hall post:
"The blur box can be seen to spill over the edge of the smart-phone. This suggests that it was applied by the TV station." bbm

If TV staff applied blur box, what did they want to conceal -
- ID of person shot?
- ID of LEO?
- LEO's actions wrt person shot?
- both?
- other? If so what?

Why?
- privacy of person shot, general principle?
- privacy of person shot, bloody & injured or partially unclothed?
- prevent family from learning of casualty or fatality from TV broadcast?
- conspiracy w LE to conceal LEO's actions, before or after shooting?
- combo of above?
- other? If so, what?

Anyone? Thx in adv.

The video is so distant and blurry that I don't think that the officers would be identifiable even if they stood and looked directly at the camera. I suspect that in the uncensored original it would have been difficult to even make out the driver's body, much less determine who she was. She also would not have been unclothed due to there being no EMTs on the scene. Note that the smart-phone recording is not an original, but a secondary recording made by pointing the phone at another phone belonging to the original recorder. The end result is triple duplication — the TV camera recorded the phone which recorded another phone which recorded the incident. This all guarantees a very indistinct video, yet the TV station still saw it necessary to place a blur box over not just the body but an officer as well. Why? And they did not blur out both officers; they only blurred the one who is leaning over the body. With all this done, they didn't play more than a fraction of a second out of a video that presumably goes on for several minutes. This is all strange behavior on the part of the TV station. Stranger still is the fact that the video has disappeared so completely it is now difficult to even verify it existed. Why has it not been aired since? Initially there may have been concerns about inadvertently identifying the people in the video, but all the people in the video were named within days of the event. Why would the video still be withheld two months later?

 

[al66pine]

.... This is all strange behavior on the part of the TV station. Stranger still is the fact that the video has disappeared so completely it is now difficult to even verify it existed. Why has it not been aired since? Initially there may have been concerns about inadvertently identifying the people in the video, but all the people in the video were named within days of the event. Why would the video still be withheld two months later?

sbm

Good questions.

 

[Woodland]

Can't help but think that the shooting of Walter Scott by a SC officer will put more pressure on this case - in that a meaningful, unbiased, plausible report needs to be produced based on the known evidence and various eyewitness accounts.

The conduct in SC is commendable imo - no riots, looting, arson etc, just people voicing their opinions. There is a video of that shooting that can be produced in court and people have chosen to let it play out - people just want the truth imo. No video exists, that we know of, for the actual moment JH was shot, but do think people will look any reports very carefully to compare evidence as if there was a video. Imo everything will have to line up now more than before - no ignoring what is there or should be there, based on 'initial' reports by LE.

Find myself more hopeful now than before that the truth will have to prevail here - makes me happy for JH family.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Can't help but think that the shooting of Walter Scott by a SC officer will put more pressure on this case - in that a meaningful, unbiased, plausible report needs to be produced based on the known evidence and various eyewitness accounts.

The conduct in SC is commendable imo - no riots, looting, arson etc, just people voicing their opinions. There is a video of that shooting that can be produced in court and people have chosen to let it play out - people just want the truth imo. No video exists, that we know of, for the actual moment JH was shot, but do think people will look any reports very carefully to compare evidence as if there was a video. Imo everything will have to line up now more than before - no ignoring what is there or should be there, based on 'initial' reports by LE.

Find myself more hopeful now than before that the truth will have to prevail here - makes me happy for JH family.

The truth. That's what everybody wants.
But I don't think JH's family will be happy if the truth isn't what they think it is.

I guess it could go either way.

As long as everybody has an open mind and takes the evidence for what it is, all should be well.

What's bad is when people see evidence that goes against what they want to believe and they refuse to believe it. That's when riots and protests seem to happen IMO.

 

[Jersey*Girl]

Can't help but think that the shooting of Walter Scott by a SC officer will put more pressure on this case - in that a meaningful, unbiased, plausible report needs to be produced based on the known evidence and various eyewitness accounts.

The conduct in SC is commendable imo - no riots, looting, arson etc, just people voicing their opinions. There is a video of that shooting that can be produced in court and people have chosen to let it play out - people just want the truth imo. No video exists, that we know of, for the actual moment JH was shot, but do think people will look any reports very carefully to compare evidence as if there was a video. Imo everything will have to line up now more than before - no ignoring what is there or should be there, based on 'initial' reports by LE.

Find myself more hopeful now than before that the truth will have to prevail here - makes me happy for JH family.

Two totally different cases... Cop in SC obviously wrong, had anger issues prior, bad cop all together it appears. This case Jessica is an obvious criminal, not the other way around. No matter how it's sliced, the girl was bad news proving she couldn't even listen to the authority of her mother the night she rolled out, took a car, and the rest is history. I'm so sick and tired of race being made an issue when it was never an issue in the first place and that's exactly what her family was doing. It's disgusting.

 

[Woodland]

Not sure how anyone can say the JH family will not be happy if the truth isn't what they think it is - that would have to come from them. Claiming to know what someone is thinking is easy - rarely accurate though.

Same for the JH family used the race card - never saw that posted anywhere, other than someone else attributing it to the family.

Let's hope the evidence will be lined up here - accurately and truthfully, not ignored or glossed over. That's my wish anyway.

 

[Fred Hall]

This case Jessica is an obvious criminal, . . .

sbm
Walter Scott was an equally obvious criminal, having been caught on camera in the act of running from an arresting officer. He was a bona fide "fleeing felon", yet prosecutors don't seem to think that this fact justified shooting him. In contrast to Walter Scott, the Hernandez case has no footage of the actual shooting, as the DPD doesn't have dash-cams for some strange reason. As a result, the exact circumstances of the Hernandez shooting will probably be impossible to determine with certainty. However, investigators will be able to ID the recovered bullets and reconstruct their trajectories, and this information will indicate where each officer was standing relative to the car when he fired. What if the bullets that struck Hernandez are found to have come from two different guns?

 

[Woodland]

Published ~ 1 hour ago, w injury & shooting ~ 6:30am, few details,
"Two Denver police officers shot and killed a young woman who struck and injured one of the officers in a stolen car,.."
"Police Chief...at the scene, said an officer had been called to check on a car that had raised suspicions.
... determined it had been reported stolen, another officer arrived.

... officers then "approached the vehicle on foot when the driver drove the car into one of the officers."
...both officers then opened fire. The officer hit by the car was taken to a hospital with a leg injury."
".... passenger in the car and was being dropped off after a night of hanging out with friends." sbm bbm
http://www.stltoday.com/news/nation...cle_3582facd-4782-5265-aac7-d7d796acbde4.html

A neighborhood resident who heard the gunshots said: " You've got stun guns. You've got rubber bullets."

Oh really? Shoot stun guns and rubber bullets at a stolen moving car that has already hit you?
Snark alert. And if those don't work, maybe step up to rubber-band guns? Ping-pong ball launchers?

SMH at neighbor's idea - stun guns or rubber bullets against moving car.

Not commenting on whether LEO's shoot was or was not justified, although that's open for discussion, esp after more info is avail.
Please this is not a gun control post or thread. Maybe 'Basement' (Pol. Pavilion?) is a better place for gun control discussion.

JM2cts.

Post #1, first and second paragraph - two cops opened fire.

 

[Fred Hall]

Post #1, first and second paragraph - two cops opened fire.

But they didn't necessarily both strike the driver. If one of the cops was in front of the car when he fired, his bullets could have been stopped by the dashboard or the steering column. In all the photos I've seen, the far left of the car's windshield is somewhat obscured by branches, so it's possible that there are bullet holes there.

 

[al66pine]

.... What if the bullets that struck Hernandez are found to have come
from two different guns?

bbm sbm

If bullets came two diff guns, then??? Which implies what?
1.
LE lied about only one officer shooting???? No, first post in thread said LE stated both LEOs fired guns.
.
"... officers then "approached the vehicle on foot when the driver drove the car into one of the officers."
...both officers then opened fire. The officer hit by the car was taken to a hospital with a leg injury." sbm bbm
http://www.stltoday.com/news/nationa...796acbde4.html"

2. Not following implication of both firing. Anyone pls? Thx in adv.

ETA: Just read Fred Halls' newer post - emphasizing (I think) -maybe bullets that hit her may have come from 2 diff guns
(not just that both officers fired.)
Still not getting implication. Anyone pls? Thx in adv.

 

[Fred Hall]

bbm sbm

If bullets came two diff guns, then??? Which implies what?
1.
LE lied about only one officer shooting???? No, first post in thread said LE stated both LEOs fired guns.
.
"... officers then "approached the vehicle on foot when the driver drove the car into one of the officers."
...both officers then opened fire. The officer hit by the car was taken to a hospital with a leg injury." sbm bbm
http://www.stltoday.com/news/nationa...796acbde4.html"

2. Not following implication of both firing. Anyone pls? Thx in adv.

ETA: Just read Fred Halls' newer post - emphasizing (I think) -maybe bullets that hit her may have come from 2 diff guns
(not just that both officers fired.)
Still not getting implication. Anyone pls? Thx in adv.

The medical report determined that all the bullets that struck the driver came from her left. If these bullets were fired from different guns it would indicate that both officers were standing on the left side of the car.

 

[Woodland]

Hmmm, the three month mark is approaching and all that is missing is an official report of the sequence of events.

Autopsy and bullet trajectory (including tox report) - check
Officer involved reports - must be a check given the time lapse
Witness Reports - check
Crime Scene Photos - check (non-official and official)
Ballistics - firing the weapons of both officers and comparing to bullets retrieved from JH or the vehicle - have to think there has been enough time for a check

So, LE, what happened in your opinion?

 

[SwampMama]

Find it repugnant LE not legally 'allowed' to offer any aid to someone they have just shot - anywhere. Who came up with that?

It doesn't take a trained EMT to apply pressure to a bleeding wound - it will be a yucky job to say the least, but necessary. A hero would do it without stopping to consider it would be heroic. A pr*k would walk away - uniformed or not uniformed. Jmo.

As a first responder (as is my husband), law enforcement's FIRST job in a volatile scene is to secure the scene, secure the suspects, tape off the area, crowd control, etc and ensure that first responders are safe. OUR safety come's first, we don't come onto the scene until it is safe to do so. We are not required to put our lives in danger.

JH is the one who caused that danger. So JH is handcuffed and searched and then LE still has 4 other suspects to deal with, as well as a quickly escalating scene. LE has their hand's full with all of that. Sorry that it seems callous to handcuff and search a dying girl but JH created this mess with her repeated bad choices. If that makes me a pr*ck to not put MY life in danger to rush onto an unsecured scene to save her, so be it. I can live with that.

 

[al66pine]

From Fred Hall's post:
"Originally Posted by Fred Hall
This clip shows about a half second of censored amateur video taken of the mouth of the lane. A blur box has been applied over what I presume is the driver's body. According to google earth she is about 100 feet from where the stolen car rests. Did an officer carry her?"

bbm
Fred Hall,
Thanks for posting these stills & vids & doing the measurement.
Must have taken some time & effort to figure it out.
Not much room for ambulance to squeeze into alley.
Seems LE w/want to preserve scene, prevent ambu driving thru shell casings, etc.,even if 'extra' LEO vehicles were moved.

Did LEOs move her from inside car to beside car, then EMTs moved her to alley end/mouth,
then left her in place there for a bit -where vid was made?
Or did LEOs move her from inside car, all the way, 100 feet, to alley end/mouth, left her there to wait for EMTs?[/

QUOTE]
(Pls scuse me for copying & pasting my own post.)

SwampMama or Other First Responders
? Thoughts from first responders POV about ^ situation?
From pix, can you tell what EMT protocol would likely dictate?
Could/should ambu get closer in? Would they put her on gurney & roll out to ambu? Is Jessica on ground or gurney?
Or offer other observation from first responders' viewpoint?
Thx in adv.

 

[SwampMama]

We would have just used the backboard, grabbed her quick, got her onto the gurney and brought to the ambulance. I can see them not wanting to contaminate the scene with an ambulance and first responders tracking thru everything. I don't know why LE would have moved her though. They don't usually have a backboard or gurney for the patient so the patient just stays in place in the scene and we can easily extract them and carry them out even if an ambulance or gurney can't get in there.

I'm curious how long it took for the first responders to get there and perhaps Jessica was moved from the scene as a safety measure. We can't go into a scene unless it is secure so perhaps LE thought it best to move JH because they were concerned about the safety of the first responders down that alley, not knowing the mood of the crowd or how family members would react or retaliate.

I could see a crazed person reacting by waiting till the LE and 1st responders are concentrated in the alley with few options for escape and shooting at them. People do crazy stuff in the heat of the moment and don't always see the first responders as "good guys". So I can see LE moving JH for that reason. We have had scenes where we had to go to a staging area and wait for LE to give the ok that they have the scene secured ( like domestic violence situations which are often unpredictable).

 

[katydid23]

I also wonder if they wanted to search them all for weapons. Getting her out of the car was probably the best way to do that. JMO