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

New Posts

katydid23 said:
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
Click to expand...

Absolutely. She needed to be extricated, cuffed and searched for weapons BEFORE first responders could help her. We simply cannot go into a scene where the patient is a threat to us.That is a basic rule that is always stressed.

Plus they had 4 other suspects to deal with, including the sister and the gf of Jessica. Plus a gathering crowd that saw the police as the enemy.
 
SwampMama,
Thx for your response.
If you have patience and time to answer another question???

Autopsy Report's "Evidence of Medical Intervention" below http://www.scribd.com/doc/257233152/...Autopsy-Report,
describes in tech med lingo ~ 4-5 procedures.
Is it possible or likely those procedures were done by first responders, either at the scene or en route to hosp?
Or types of procedures that w/be done in ER or OR only?
Thx in adv.

4-c9bb7ff738.jpg
 
Snipped from SwampMama's post:
"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."

Short answer: I do not recall seeing anything definitive about ambu arrival time at scene.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Long answer- a lot of events in ~ 1 hour but no time of ambu arrival.
Timeline Jan 26................................ a.m.
1 call to 911 ............................................
2 initial dispatch call to LEO......................... 6:30
"According to Denver Police, an officer was called to the scene at 6:30 a.m. to investigate suspicious activity in the alleyway.
http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/2015/...ting/22408439/
 _ LEO runs plates......................................
_ LEO request for backup ...........................
_ backup arrives .......................................
_ __
_ call while confronting?...............................
_ call after confronting JH? ...........................
_ LEOs discharge weapons ..........................
_ LEO call for ambulance..............................
_ ambulance arrives ................................?
_ ambulance departs ..................................
_ ambulance arrives hosp ER ......................
_ hosp ER admits JH...................................
# hosp ER pronounces her dead............... 7:29? per A/Rpt.
# time of death..................................... 7:29
# time of death per Autopsy Rpt. page 1 (?presumably based on hosp ER records?)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/257233152/...Autopsy-Report
 
katydid23 said:
here is the link:

http://www.9news.com/story/news/loca...tory/22449579/


I dont get what you mean, exactly. You mean she hit him after she was shot? That would make sense. But she still would have to have been aiming the car in his direction, because she did not turn after she was shot.
Click to expand...

If you do some research I think you will find that what happens after a driver gets shot is very unpredictable. There have been many crimes where a driver gets shot and then the out of control vehicle hits all kinds of things. People, buildings other vehicles. That doesn't mean that the driver was aiming for those things. For that reason many police departments ban officers from ever shooting at a driver.
 
KaaBoom said:
If you do some research I think you will find that what happens after a driver gets shot is very unpredictable. There have been many crimes where a driver gets shot and then the out of control vehicle hits all kinds of things. People, buildings other vehicles. That doesn't mean that the driver was aiming for those things. For that reason many police departments ban officers from ever shooting at a driver.
Click to expand...

I did do a bit of research. This case is unusual because she was not really driving when this all started. She was parked, and the cop saw that she put it into drive and BEGAN to pull forward...it's not like she was driving down the road at full speed and was shot. I think they began shooting as she took off.
 
katydid23 said:
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
Click to expand...
The officers did not just take the driver out of the car; they apparently carried her to a location that was over 100 feet away from it. One of the officers would have been preoccupied with the passengers, so I'm guessing that the driver was carried by only one officer. How did he do it, I wonder? Fireman's carry? Arms carry? He would have gotten blood on himself, and if so, his bloodstained uniform will show up as evidence in the investigation.
 
katydid23 said:
I did do a bit of research. This case is unusual because she was not really driving when this all started. She was parked, and the cop saw that she put it into drive and BEGAN to pull forward...it's not like she was driving down the road at full speed and was shot. I think they began shooting as she took off.
Click to expand...
Where do you think the officers were standing relative to the car when the shots were fired?
 
SwampMama said:
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.
Click to expand...

The quote you are referencing, and the posts leading up to it, do not discuss first responders as leaving an injured/dying person with no assistance. The discussion is/was about what LE at that particular scene did and did not do. Unsure how/why first responders have been inserted into the post.
 
Originally Posted by SwampMama 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.

Woodland said:
The quote you are referencing, and the posts leading up to it, do not discuss first responders as leaving an injured/dying person with no assistance. The discussion is/was about what LE at that particular scene did and did not do. Unsure how/why first responders have been inserted into the post.
Click to expand...

Issues discussed in earlier posts:
- did LEOs move Jessica from inside car to outside. IIRC, witnesses said LEOs, not 1st responders, moved her from car.
- once outside car, presumably Jessica was not ambulatory, who moved her ~100 feet along alley
 (to where it meets the street, where a photo shows her, on ground, maybe on backboard or low gurney)?

Fred Hall's posts, earlier & this a.m., theorize one LEO moved her 100' along the alley.
"The officers did not just take the driver out of the car; they apparently carried her to a location that was over 100 feet away from it. One of the officers would have been preoccupied with the passengers, so I'm guessing that the driver was carried by only one officer. How did he do it, I wonder? Fireman's carry? Arms carry?"

IMO, first responders have not been (inappropriately) inserted into the thread. They were at the scene & took action.
Personally, I'm not sure if first responders carried Jessica 100' along alley, or if one or multiple LEOs did that.
Seems like that info would be in LE or FR reports not yet publicly released.

I hope SwampMama & other first responders did not take offense at any implication - their input was not welcome.
On this and another forum I frequent first responders provide much needed info & insight re various aspects of their jobs.
Paid or volunteer, full time or part time, first responders make valuable contributions to RL, as well as online.
JM2cts.

Thank you very much SwampMama for your service. Ditto your husband. Ditto other FRs.:loveyou:
 
Not seeing a post re - first responders have been inappropriately inserted into thread. Do see where a post has been incorrectly interpreted to be about first responders, but not the thread. This is not part of moving JH 100 feet - the two are meshed and now mashed.
 
katydid23 said:
I did do a bit of research. This case is unusual because she was not really driving when this all started. She was parked, and the cop saw that she put it into drive and BEGAN to pull forward...it's not like she was driving down the road at full speed and was shot. I think they began shooting as she took off.
Click to expand...

How do you know the car was not already in drive? How many drivers put the car in park when they stop for a second to drop someone off? I don't.

If she was stopped with her foot on the brake, then she gets shot, her body goes limp and her foot goes off the brake, the car rolls forward until it hits something.
 
KaaBoom said:
How do you know the car was not already in drive? How many drivers put the car park when they stop for a second to drop someone off? I don't.

If she was stopped with her foot on the brake, then she gets shot, her body goes limp and her foot goes off the brake, the car rolls forward until it hits something.
Click to expand...

She didnt stop to drop someone off. She and her friends had been parked there most of the night, resting, chilling, listening to music.
 
This is the first thing I've seen regarding JH being a part of an actual auto theft ring. Interesting.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...-ring-and-killed-denver-teen-jessie-hernandez

Westminster has had 126 car thefts this year, compared to 70 by this date last year.

Police in Westminster tell 7NEWS that recent arrests involving Thornton and Westminster cases involve a known auto theft ring.

"The people that were arrested are connected in the same auto theft ring that Jessica Hernandez was involved with," said Westminster Police Department spokeswoman Cheri Spottke.
 
katydid23 said:
She didnt stop to drop someone off. She and her friends had been parked there most of the night, resting, chilling, listening to music.
Click to expand...

Thanks, do you have a source for that? I thought I had read that she was dropping off one of the girls, but I can't find that article now.
 
I've always seen it reported that the car was parked in the alley for a while. With loud music coming from it.
 
Woodland said:
Not seeing a post re - first responders have been inappropriately inserted into thread. Do see where a post has been incorrectly interpreted to be about first responders, but not the thread. This is not part of moving JH 100 feet - the two are meshed and now mashed.
Click to expand...

I identified myself and husband as first responders to indicate where my viewpoint and experience in the subject matter comes from. It seems that a few posters felt that JH being cuffed and searched was a "bizarre assault" by an "enraged" LE and that LE not immediately turning all of their attention to saving the life of JH made them "pr*cks".

I was simply pointing out that it is common procedure to secure the scene first ( C&S, detain other possible threats, etc) and then allow first responders to render aid (or render basic aid themselves till EMTs get there). LE had their hands full with the 4 other passengers, the crowd, a crime scene, and such. They cannot ignore their own safety in order to render aid to JH.

That is simply commonly accepted protocol. I hope that clears why I brought up "first responders".
 
SwampMama said:
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.
Click to expand...

BBM - clear.
 
SwampMama said:
I identified myself and husband as first responders to indicate where my viewpoint and experience in the subject matter comes from. It seems that a few posters felt that JH being cuffed and searched was a "bizarre assault" by an "enraged" LE and that LE not immediately turning all of their attention to saving the life of JH made them "pr*cks".

I was simply pointing out that it is common procedure to secure the scene first ( C&S, detain other possible threats, etc) and then allow first responders to render aid (or render basic aid themselves till EMTs get there). LE had their hands full with the 4 other passengers, the crowd, a crime scene, and such. They cannot ignore their own safety in order to render aid to JH.

That is simply commonly accepted protocol. I hope that clears why I brought up "first responders".
Click to expand...

Commonly accepted by whom? Police? In any case, the behavior of the officers after the shooting is secondary to the question of whether or not the shooting was justified in the first place. If the shooting was unjustified, their alleged acts in the aftermath make it look like second-degree murder rather than manslaughter. But it doesn't matter. The conflict of interest that D.A's have in dealing with police is well known, and Morrissey won't dare charge these officers no matter how much evidence he has on them. He has probably been wracking his brains these past months trying decide how he will justify the shooting in his decision letter. This case really needs federal involvement.
 
"Originally Posted by SwampMama I identified myself and husband as first responders to indicate where my viewpoint and experience in the subject matter comes from. It seems that a few posters felt that JH being cuffed and searched was a "bizarre assault" by an "enraged" LE and that LE not immediately turning all of their attention to saving the life of JH made them "pr*cks". "
"I was simply pointing out that it is common procedure to secure the scene first ( C&S, detain other possible threats, etc) and then allow first responders to render aid (or render basic aid themselves till EMTs get there). LE had their hands full with the 4 other passengers, the crowd, a crime scene, and such. They cannot ignore their own safety in order to render aid to JH."
"That is simply commonly accepted protocol. I hope that clears why I brought up "first responders"." bbm

Fred Hall said:
Commonly accepted by whom? Police? In any case, the behavior of the officers after the shooting is secondary to the question of whether or not the shooting was justified in the first place. ..
Click to expand...
sbm bbm

I'm confused about second ^post. Does anyone think -
- in gen. LE wants to delay FRs arriving on scene from providing med attn to ppl who need treatment?
- in gen FRs s/b/expected to enter scene before LE tries to make sure nobody there has means to injure or kill FRs.

If FRs are required to rush in, before LE secures scene -
- would FRs on payroll demand waaay more $$$ & expanded benefits - all health ins paid & $$$$ life ins policies?
- would supply of volunteer FRs dwindle to point of what? Forcing some municipalities to forego these services?

Which public sector jobs require employees w no weapons, to risk life & limb at hands of others?
Let's see - LE, nope, got weapons; fire fighters - ??? Others? Not coming to mind, may be overlooking some.

I'm puzzled about what second post implies, may be misreading it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 87 more.
Total: 1,323 (members: 88, guests: 1,235)

Online statistics

Members online
88
Guests online
1,235
Total visitors
1,323
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,783
Messages
17,958,828
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top