Video: Non-compliant Mich. man jumps from car, gets shot

Source: Police One

PITTSFIELD TOWNSHIP, Mich. — Prosecutors are rethinking their decision to clear a Michigan officer of criminal wrongdoing in a January officer-involved shooting.

The case of Washtenaw County Officer Tracy Yurkunas has been reopened as new video has emerged, according to the Ann Arbor News.

Due to technical difficulties, the below video was not available at the time Yurkunas was cleared of any wrongdoing, but prosecutors are reviewing the videotape now that it has been made available.

According to the report, AnnArbor.com obtained the video through the Freedom of Information Act.


Read more: http://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/3442914-Video-Mich-cop-shoots-unarmed-man-who-raised-his-hands/

---

Not mentioned in this article, the original reason for the stop was the male was a domestic violence suspect who had fled the scene and the officer was attempting to arrest him. I can't find reference to the original report to find out if there was any information given by the RP that the male was habitually armed etc. or what other facts and circumstances were known to the officer at the time of the shoot, apart from the fact that he was a domestic violence suspect she was seeking to arrest

hidden, though probably not intentionally. She was in the middle of yelling "put your hands up" when she fired.

Can't help but thinking it was accidental, and all the reasoning came after.

Good reason for keeping the trigger finger off the trigger, but next to it, until you are ready and need to kill.

so I doubt it was unintentional (no such thing as accidental in the firearms tactics world)...

Personally, I don't do "felony stops" (which she did) on misdemeanant assault suspects, but again I can't find the original report to see if there were additional specific articulable reasons to do a felony stop. Granted, DV assault is a violent crime, but I've arrested a couple of dozen such people fleeing or having fled the scene w/o felony stop tactics.

Given those tactics, and the way he exited the car (all he needed to do was keep his hands up. That quick move and reaching for the waist created the exigency. His doing), I can't fault her for her actions. I am certainly confident no criminal charges will be filed. Civil are a possibility

Guy in San Francisco shoots and kills a suspect, said he thought it was his taser...

Another - http://articles.courant.com/2011-01-09/news/hc-bristol-officer-shoots-self-0109_1_bristol-police-officer-shot-cumberland-farms-service-revolver

This guy could have put his hands up, and is at fault for not doing that. But I live in a town where a policeman just killed a preacher who was armed on his own property.

The officer's story, (the only one since he killed the other guy) is that he was telling him to put the gun on the ground while he was striking him with the baton (no bruises later in autopsy) and he reached for the pistol after he put it in his belt.

I think he was trying to do what the officer said with a gun on him, the officer's reasoning is that he was going to pull it out and fire, even though he had a gun on the guy and was yelling at him to put it on the ground. Then his story changed slightly and he said he then told the guy to get on the ground. The preacher was aroun d70 ish, probably couldn't hear well.

He killed him, we will never know.

I have worked the street next to officers, (medic in a bigger city for a couple years - sometimes we got there first) and I know how hard those decisions are. Don't know if it can be made any safer or easier.

I am just saying the proper terminology is "unintentional" not accidental, although I know what you mean. We index, and do not place finger on trigger until we have DECIDED to fire.

This video is lightning fast and many people will sit there and watch it several times before making a decision, even going frame by frame to do that. What I think is important to remember is that this officer did not have that luxury. This happened lightning fast, and I am sure her only motive was going home alive.

We put way too many cops on the street with guns & very little training considering they are carrying deadly weapons.

Probably legal/lawful in the long run, but morally questionable. To be expected though. If you're sighting down your weapon, tunnel vision will prevent you from identifying whether there is an actual object in the person's hand. Combined with the suspect's non-compliance..

Unfortunate consequence of the situation.

an "actual threat in the person's hands" is not a requirement to shoot. His reaching towards his waist band like that could be enough ... again based on the totality.

There is certainly not a legal requirement for her to wait until he actually drew something from his waistband, especially considering she did not have cover (trust me - a door is not cover. I've shot through a car door before, and she was only partially concealed), proximity, etc.

I am, though, strictly speaking legally. I'm not making a moral judgment at all, so that's not really responsive to your distinction, I agree

I think the unfortunate consequence ultimately was created by his choices. I've been on scores of felony stops and none resulted in a shooting. Heck, we had one where we ended up chasing a murder suspect (not a DV assault suspect) after he jumped from his car and ran. He eventually tripped and caught him. Legally, if he was getting away, it would have been justified to shoot him in the back- he had a warrant for murder, and we had knowledge he was seeking to kill a current witness in the area. Fortunately, it didn't have to happen.

If he had made motions like this guy did, can't say what would have happened

and the dirt bag lived!?

But I guess you'll accept that his girlfriend fell into the door knob bruising her face then into her computer bruising her chest

of course this is still alleged but.............
http://www.annarbor.com/news/the-washtenaw-county-prosecutors-office/
According to reports, the woman was assaulted after Reddick asked her to pay a bill, but she declined. He broke her computer, police reports say, grabbed her by the neck and pushed her to the ground. He kicked and punched her, leaving her with bruises to her face, her arm and her shoulder, police reports say. She also complained of pain in her abdomen, but did not require medical attention.

it was a response to a dynamic street situation. Iow, whether it is awful is one thing, but whether it is lawful is another. The thing is he brought it entirely upon himself. If he had simply exited the car with his hands up, we wouldn't be discussing it. It would be the "routine arrest" that occurs a thousand + times vs. the shooting, that happens so very rarely.

Mea culpa. I'll try to remember that in the future. :(

Although in this case, assuming a felony stop was justified, a taser would be fine as a less lethal option given (optimal) at least 1 and preferably two other officers using lethal (firearms). In deadly force situations, such as a felony stop, they are an addition, not a replacement

In my area, just a couple of days ago a cop was getting attacked by some nimrod with a machete and there were enough officers on scene such that several cops stood by with deadly force while others attempted tasers. He was tased twice unsuccessfully at which point he got too close and had to be shot

I've been tased three times btw. Big fun... :l

and I got bragging rights, since most of the guys in the class wimped out on the opportunity

... for the force he was joining, it was required as they wanted to officers to know exactly what would happen to the person tased. At the time, he was much bigger, perhaps 250 lbs., and told us how they had three others standing behind him to lay him down when it happened. It left a lasting impression on him. He never joked about using a taser again.

fwiw, my union argues that the dept. cannot FORCE one to submit to such tasing as a part of training. It violates our rights. Since the dept. mandates us to carry a taser, they cannot force us to be tased as part of training. Viva labor rights.

However, we are free to volunteer to do so. And I have. If we want to be a taser instructor, we must be tased. That is kosher with union concerns, since it is a voluntary position we seek, not a mandatory imposition by management.

It was not a lot of fun. Fwiw, the more muscular you are, the more effective the taser is, since it relies on neuromuscular incapacitation (for any dart tase, a contact tase is pain compliance). I am weight classed athlete with a fair amount of LBM. It was quite... invigorating...