Deputy Wyman's killer indicted

[dgriffin]

FA wrote: "Ahh, but it does matter who he did and didn't point the gun at. Matters very much actually."
It certainly matters that Patterson pointed the gun at Deputy Wyman, pulled the trigger and killed the man.

And, "A lawful order is considered when there is just basis for issuing it." Do I hear your argument correctly? That a police officer responding to the scene of a domestic dispute when encountering a man with a shotgun does not have the right to issue an order to the man to lay down his weapon? And that is so because a man's home is his castle?

Maybe I'm confused as to what you're arguing, so help me out. Who would you say was most responsible for the death of a man that night?

[Ralph]

Aug 1, 2011 21:56:21 GMT -5 @dgriffin said:

FA wrote: "Ahh, but it does matter who he did and didn't point the gun at. Matters very much actually."
It certainly matters that Patterson pointed the gun at Deputy Wyman, pulled the trigger and killed the man.

And, "A lawful order is considered when there is just basis for issuing it." Do I hear your argument correctly? That a police officer responding to the scene of a domestic dispute when encountering a man with a shotgun does not have the right to issue an order to the man to lay down his weapon? And that is so because a man's home is his castle?

Maybe I'm confused as to what you're arguing, so help me out. Who would you say was most responsible for the death of a man that night?

The man that ordered the mad rush on a cornered individual during a suicide attempt.

It's just not done, period.

I am sure he was instructed to lay down his weapon and come out, after that it is about protecting those outside the perimeter and keeping the subject in one place. Step two is negotiating with him to surrender or wait until he dies from lack of food, water or simply boredom....period.

Take it from any tactical playbook you want; Military, SWAT, Police, FBI, whatever.........time is on your side, especially in a suicide situation.
The only person ever to be in danger here was the perpetrator himself.
First course is protect civilians, second course yourselves, then you wait.

As far as the legalities of Patterson shooting Wyman, that is for others to haggle in court, and I am sure it is something that will bog down and haunt everyone. We can't get in his head and visualize what was happening at the time; self defense, attack, suicide by cop, a dozen different scenarios come to mind.
Only thing for sure is that it never should have happened at all.

If I were looking for someone at the top of the list in a wrongful death lawsuit.....................

................it wouldn't be Patterson.

[JGRobinson]

Dave, in the phrase Lawful Order, the term "Lawful" is highly interpretive according to your perspective and "Orders" speaks of a higher authority in a Chain of Command. It can't easily be applied in the same sense to Civilian non Military or Non Law Enforcement Personnel. ROE's, Mission and Situation dictate the Op Tempo and all Offensive actions that can be considered by the leadership. Almost all orders are considered Lawful if issued by the chain of command to its links. Determination of the validity of LO's are usually made in a Courts Martial or an inquisition after the action in question is determined "in need of further investigation". If any Lawful or Unlawful order situation exits, it was issued by the Sheriff or the Authority that ordered the Officers to Assault the objective with what would be perceived as deadly force, that was likely an Unlawful Order.

Sorry BZ, Didn't mean to get ya fired up, there are two different issues here as I see it, the actions that began the standoff and the ones that ended it. I agree with you, Patterson started it, where I disagree with you is how the situation was brought to a close. This was a tragic lesson in Combat Tactics 202. Its this Anti Armor Infantry Platoon Sergeant/ semi highly trained Infantry Tacticians opinion that the methods employed by the Sheriffs Office were inappropriate given the conditions, highly ineffective and possibly illegal. In this case they were deadly and likely only could have ended like this given the actions of the police that lead up to certain death.

I was taught since I was a child that you never point a gun at anything unless you are prepared to kill it. In that same sense, I would assume anyone pointing a gun at me plays by the same rules. Patterson's Military experience would have only added credence to that rule of thumb. I'm sure the Iraqi' insurgents never shot plastic dum dums at him or his cohorts. In combat, Boom means doom, we are trained to instinctively return fire aggressively until your were the only one left firing.

I do wish Patterson had given up his weapon at the beginning but he didn't, he hadn't committed a crime with it so they had few grounds to assault him over it. I also wish the Police hadn't engaged him with gunfire first but they did, they had to guess that may provoke some type of a response if it werent 100% effective at knocking him down and it did, he defended himself.

Once the bullets started flying, it was a gunfight. It doesn't really matter if one or more of the participants is shooting Plastic bullets unless the other one is aware of the plan and sane. Patterson was neither at the moment he returned fire, I do believe he thought he would die if he didn't defend himself and he was obviously unstable for at least the prior 6 hours.

Anyone with any sense wouldn't bring a club to a gunfight and they knew he was armed and highly trained to defend himself. Just Sayin!

[firstamendment]

Dave, Patterson never pointed the gun at Wyman until he was fired upon. Different situation there. Threatening someone with a weapon is a Menacing charge and there is a different menacing charge for such threats levied against a police officer. Note, Patterson has not been charged nor indicted on any menacing charges and Mc Namara stated Patterson never threatened any law enforcement personnel that night. At any time if he made any threatening statements or actions toward them, it changes the tone completely. But they've already stated he never did, not until they shot him. Their actions is the key element that changed the situation dramatically.

Again, the lawful order issue. Did they have reasonable suspicion he committed any crimes in initiate an arrest? Probably not. Even if they did have probable cause it amounted to 2nd Degree Harassment, its an appearance ticket on a violation, not even a misdemeanor. What kept them at the scene was their duty to protect life, and that night it was Patterson's life they were trying to save from himself. Where is the crime in trying to kill oneself? What can they arrest him for simply because he sat in his garage contemplating suicide? If they can talk him down, most assuredly they'd take him into protective custody for his own safety and bring him to a hospital. But that is not being arrested for suspicion of committing a crime. Does taking a suicidal person into protective custody still constitute an arrest and would resisting constitute resisting arrest? It does not appear to be so.

It is tragic that a good man lost his life that night. But that does not excuse the Sheriff's office for poor tactical decisions. Ralph's assessments are spot on, they had the benefit of time to wait him out and opted to act hastily. Ask yourself, would he have started shooting at police if they didn't initiate an armed response at him first? 6 hours had passed and never did. What changed all that was the fateful decision to shoot at him.

[firstamendment]

Aug 2, 2011 5:18:18 GMT -5 JGRobinson said:

I do wish Patterson had given up his weapon at the beginning but he didn't, he hadn't committed a crime with it so they had few grounds to assault him over it. I also wish the Police hadn't engaged him with gunfire first but they did, they had to guess that may provoke some type of a response if it werent 100% effective at knocking him down and it did, he defended himself.

Exactly. He only threatened himself with the gun and they can't charge him for threatening to harm himself. Because of this, I am scratching my head how he was indicted for criminal possession of a weapon. He did lawfully own it and wasn't threatening harm to others with it.

We all wish he had surrendered, but as I directed to BZ earlier, we are trying to rationalize the mind and behaviors of someone in an irrational, emotional state. Who knows what events set him over the edge to bring it where it was. All we are aware of is that some rift occurred between he and his significant other and whatever the scope of that issue was, it was enough to break the man. Negotiators are trained with psychological techniques in order to resolve these situations peacefully. More often than not, they are effective strategies. From what I was told, they never had the significant other try to talk to him and get him to end this. I believe that is usually SOP (Standard Operating Procedure for those who don't know) to get someone either on scene or on the horn that is personally connected to the person in question. Bringing someone in who knows them helps to establish a connection with them to reach a place that a stranger like a negotiator can't. Why was this not done?

Even if he were so bent from whatever transpired between he and the significant other, she probably had the best shot of trying to talk him down. Even if she had to lie to him, she was probably the most connected to get through to him.

[dgriffin]

I think the jury will look at it as I posed the question, Who was Most Responsible for the death of Wyman. Only Ralph answered my question and despite his knowledge of police tactics, I disagree with his answer. Had Patterson done as he was told by the police, everyone would have returned home that night or the next morning.

I think the "lawful order yes or no" argument won't even appear in his defense since it is too thin, IMHO. I can't imagine myself as a defense attorney trying to sell that to a jury since it would make my case appear as good as lost.

The police actions will be judged as poor by the general population, probably, even so by fellow policemen, but the fact remains that Patterson caused the incident, Patterson pointed his gun at the deputy, Patterson pulled the trigger and Patterson killed a policeman in his garage that night. His lawyer may try to cut a deal in view of extenuating circumstances and possibly the fault of police tactics, but I believe the responsibility for the deputy's death will be seen by a jury to be clearly that of the shooter.

One last thought about coulda/shoulda's and the cops. While we can hope they will use the latest and best techniques in handling such situations, even when the police are not at their best they are not responsible for someone who pulls the trigger.

If we live in a society where a person can kill another and be exonerated because those asked to prevent him from doing so were unable to accomplish their task, I'd say we're in a lot of trouble. Especially if the person trying to stop him was the one killed.

[firstamendment]

But Patterson did not pull the trigger on police until they pulled the trigger on him. That is a key element to this case and the outcome that cannot be ignored.

[dgriffin]

Aug 2, 2011 16:54:22 GMT -5 firstamendment said:

But Patterson did not pull the trigger on police until they pulled the trigger on him. That is a key element to this case and the outcome that cannot be ignored.

That sounds mitigating, of course, but I'm sure the people on the scene when appearing in court will give a different interpretation. We get a foretaste of future testimony from what's already been said.

Here's what Maciol told the WSYR:

“He was struck by the ammunition - the less lethal ammunition - and that's when he was knocked back,” Maciol said. Then, according to the Sheriff, Wyman approached Patterson with his taser. Patterson was, however, able to recover control of his gun and shoot.

"He was able to recover control of his gun and shoot," sounds more purposeful to me than a man shooting wildly in self defense. True? It's probably what Maciol will tell the jury.

Even more supportive of that view is what Maciol told the Utica Daily News:

Inv. David Nowakowski and Sgt. Robert Nelson had tried in vain during the six-hour standoff to negotiate with Patterson. They thought he might harm himself, and attempted to take him into custody at around 2 a.m. Tuesday. That, Maciol said, is when shots rang out and Wyman was killed. Patterson also shot at Nowakowski.

"Patterson also shot at Nowakowski," also sounds far from a situation where a man is firing wildly, blindly in self defense. Sounds more to me like he was pissed off. Or attempting suicide-by-cop.

OK, I'm done. You've got my opinion, for what it's worth. I can't think of anything further I should add. I frankly don't know the answer to this riddle. I've been thinking and arguing from the point of view of a jury member hearing testimony I think is likely to be given. And I've been (sort of) pretending FA and JG are the defense counsel. (I have to say you've been working hard for your client )

I would like to hear from others who have not yet commented, however. There must be other aspects that you (FA), JG, Clipper, Ralph, Bz and myself have overlooked.

Here are the story paragraphs I used above:

WSYR
The county’s Emergency Response Team decided to use hard foam ammunition to temporarily incapacitate Patterson. At 2 a.m., Deputies had the opening for which they had been waiting. “He was struck by the ammunition - the less lethal ammunition - and that's when he was knocked back,” Maciol said. Then, according to the Sheriff, Wyman approached Patterson with his taser. Patterson was, however, able to recover control of his gun and shoot. “I can only surmise that Deputy Wyman saw an opportunity to preserve Christian Patterson's life, to protect his fellow deputies and to diffuse that situation in a heroic and selfless act,” Maciol said. “He's just a hero and saw an opportunity. I can't stress that enough.”
www.9wsyr.com/news/local/story/Accused-cop-killer-arraigned/DdwRjiY1w0-RqXJyQYknaA.cspx

Utica Daily News
Inv. David Nowakowski and Sgt. Robert Nelson had tried in vain during the six-hour standoff to negotiate with Patterson. They thought he might harm himself, and attempted to take him into custody at around 2 a.m. Tuesday. That, Maciol said, is when shots rang out and Wyman was killed. Patterson also shot at Nowakowski. A shooting spree ensued after Patterson began firing, and three deputies shot back, injuring the suspect.
uticadailynews.com/utica_daily_focus/21155-Deputy-Kurt-Wyman-shot-and-killed-during-six-hour-standoff.html

YNN
After a five hour standoff, investigators say Patterson shot deputy Wyman and fired a second shot at other officers. Deputies returned fire, hitting Patterson several times.
utica-mohawkvalley.ynn.com/content/all_news/central_new_york/545971/deputy-shot-and-killed-during-standoff/

[dgriffin]

Sorry, I meant to point out the YNN story says Patterson fired TWICE. A witness in the neighborhood said, however, she heard one loud bang followed by smaller bangs. Hard to tell how the prosecution and the very willing witnesses will play it.

And I just want to add that my last post sounds like I may not believe Patterson to necessarily to be guilty. I do, morally and legally.

[JGRobinson]

I'm sad to say that nothing we say or do will bring back Officer Wyman. He died following orders and doing an honorable job that most of us would never choose to do. God Bless him where hes heading and the Family he leaves behind as they struggle to come to grips with this senseless loss. Mr Patterson is also a victim, From War Hero to Cop Killer in 6 hours flat. His original crime sounds like a mental breakdown, his acts of self defense against a perceived threat to his life have changed his life and hundreds of others in unforgivable ways forever. This discussion wont help fix the past but it could shed light on how we can resolve more of these situations peacefully in the future.

Seems to me that an awful lot of deadly exchanges have been occurring between Law Enforcement and the citizenry they are protecting and defending, both have paid the ultimate price for their reactions. Syracuse has had its share in the last months and the news is full of it around the nation daily, its a modern day deadly game of Cops and Robbers out there and both are playing for keeps.

Justice is rarely served best by the Police, its the law of the land that it should be delivered by the courts. Innocent until proven guilty is the law, the precursors of these fatalities very often don't rise to the level of murder until provoked with Offensive actions by the "Authorities", The Branch Dividians and other tragedies have illuminated that in a grand way. Why do we need Lawyers, Public Defenders, Judges, Jails and Juries if the police are expected and allowed to access the Perpetrator, crime and exact the punishment based on a tiny window of view into the life of the citizen?

Crime scene investigation and Criminal prosecution are not perfect science. State of mind, Intent and Perspective are considered in the trial because they are all factors of the Crime In Question. If a police officer guns down someone who says they are wearing a bomb vest in a public spot, they could be a Hero or the cause of something horrible yet our urge is most often to defend the actions of our Public Warriors both Military and Civilian.

If there is no bomb, the Officer was justified by the threat alone, hes a Hero

If there is a bomb and the Bomber is killed without detonation, they are Hero's

If the Bomber or a Bullet from the Police Detonate the Bomb, many people could be killed or injured, The assault not the bomb could be the the real killer but he's still our Hero for trying.

These are the way we see almost all interactions play out in the movies, TV shows, Video Games and now in reality. Resolving these things peacefully is not in vogue, doing it quickly is.

I'm not suggesting Police risk more, I just believe they and we might be better off with them using restraint before exerting aggression. Police, Military and Special Services Members all know they may not survive their career choices, thats a fact. They take both more responsibility and more risk than those who dont choose those jobs, its inherent with the ID Card we carry. We do equip them with advanced Protective Posture, Lethal Weaponry and Non Lethal restraint tools most Civilians dont have to mitigate many of the risks. Some really do make an active crime scene safer especially when deployed as designed and intended but not all of them. They need to use them more responsibly and recognize the limitations of their tools and their training. This isnt Miami Vice, the show doesn't need to end immediately because your shift is or for commercial break, send in the next team and wait it out.

Knoxboro isn't the Bronx or Corn Hill, Its a sleepy little 'Boro with less people in 2 square miles than in a single block of Syracuse. Kent state wasn't acceptable for the same reason this isn't, it wasn't necessary to end the standoff. The area that that house is located could be shut down for a week and almost nobody would be without access to their homes or property. There was really no need to ramp this up without exhausting less intense methods first.

As long as there are Criminals and Mental Deficiencies our Constitution will protect their rights to a trial not just speedy justice at the hands of Law Enforcement. We will always have rights and responsibilities that put Officers and Civilians at risk. I think these are reasonable unavoidable costs for a free nation, its how we respond to emergent situations that we can control, and must learn how to do better!

[dgriffin]

JG: "I'm not suggesting Police risk more, I just believe they and we might be better off with them using restraint before extreme aggression."

Yes, I agree. The example that often comes to mind is the 120 mph high speed chase that could have been avoided had the police simply made sure the perp went home and then stopped to pick him up later.

I've never tried it , but I imagine police work to be like war has been described, terrifically boring but punctuated by short periods of pure terror. Adrenaline -fueled reactions are what the Policies try to avoid and most often I think these reasoned methods for dealing with situations save lives. This time either they were not followed or they didn't work. I guess we'll find out more at the trial.

[JGRobinson]

I agree Dave, A Grunts life is 99% digging Fighting Positions we will never battle from, Training for odd scenario's that will never play out in front of us and acting like people are shooting real projectiles at us when we know its just an intense game of laser tag.

I never got shot at with a real bullet in 21 years except in basic training and that was a Drill Sergeant firing an Russian AK medium machine gun 3 feet over our heads as we low crawled under razor wire. Reality was always a bit scarier than MILES laser Tag but laser tag is safer training tool. We did many live fire moving and Demolition Ranges that were as dangerous as you can imagine. It took months to train for some of those Ranges, We had to prove that we could do all of the Dry Fire Drills Perfect Every single time before we got unction to shoot danger close arround each other with really dangerous stuff. Ive signed for and transported 100 tons of TOW Missile, 50 cal, 40MM Grenade, C4, Dynamite, Det Cord, Fuses, Fuse, Caps, Simulators, Mortars and M16 in My HUMMV with Trailer. We never fired a single round at or blew up an enemy combatant (or a US Soldier Luckily) in all of my years. I helped to train no less than 150 different Non Commissioned Officers, Officers and Soldiers in 17 years of the NYARNG that went to Iraq less than a year after I retired and God Bless they all came back in one piece. Some of them have done Multiple Tours voluntarily to include my Step Brother!

The last 15 years in Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Covertly else-where's have reminded us why we train as we fight, every time. This is so that we will be prepared to react the way we've been trained instead of making it up as we go along. Its still not perfect but its the best we have, our military wide motto is, "Live to Fight Another Day"! That doesn't mean kill anything that moves either. It means learn, practice and teach Technical and Tactical excellence so that you can react correctly every single time. excuses don't bring back Soldiers or Civilians killed or injured unnecessarily.

The Police force does have much more action than many Military Units (that dont go to Ft Drum) and much less ongoing, keep up and Leadership training than the Military as a whole. That's exactly why they employ special teams highly trained for these situation's, QRF's as a general descriptor. They should do that more often...

[dgriffin]

I imagine stuff like this is on the minds of officers responding to the scene of a man with a gun.....






Two Florida officers killed in shootout; suspect found dead


By Tamara Lush and Mitch Stacy
The Associated Press


Posted: 01/25/2011 01:00:00 AM MST
Updated: 01/25/2011 01:37:20 AM MST



ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. — Authorities and a fugitive holed up in an attic fired more than 100 shots at each other Monday in a firefight that killed two officers, wounded a deputy U.S. marshal and led to an hours-long standoff that ended when the suspect was found dead inside the home.

Police spokesman Michael Puetz said officers went into the home about six hours after the shootout, the latest in a recent rash of shootings across the nation that have killed or wounded law enforcement officers.

Law enforcement had been at the home to arrest Hydra Lacy Jr., 39, around 7 a.m. on an aggravated-battery charge, and investigators later identified him as the one who opened fire on the officers, Puetz said.

He said Lacy had a long record that includes convictions for armed robbery and sexual battery. He had been listed as a sex offender with the state since 1996 and failed to register in December with the Pinellas County Sheriff's Department, which he was required to do four times a year. Deputies had been looking for him since then, and local officers had been told Friday to be on the lookout for Lacy.

"He was somebody we wanted to get off the streets," Police Chief Chuck Harmon said. "Who expects to walk into a house and get gunfire from the attic?"

A marshal was shot twice but was doing fine, Chief Deputy U.S. Marshal Tom Figmik said.

One officer, the marshal and a Pinellas County sheriff's deputy were the first ones at the house and were told by a woman that Lacy was in the attic. The three called for backup, and soon after, officers Jeffrey Yaslowitz, 39, and Tom Baitinger, 48, arrived.

Police had initially said they were among the first three to arrive.

The chief said Yaslowitz and the marshal, who was not identified, went up to the attic and exchanged fire with the suspect. Both were hit. Yaslowitz went down in the attic, while the marshal tumbled to the first floor after being hit in his bulletproof

Baitinger was one of several officers who came to rescue the other two and was hit and killed when Lacy fired through the attic floor.

Hostage negotiators arrived, and the SWAT team exchanged more gunfire with Lacy. The SWAT team eventually got Yaslowitz out of the house, destroying about a third of the home in the process. He was later pronounced dead.

State records show Lacy was convicted in 1989 of armed burglary, resisting arrest with violence and other charges. He was released from prison in 1991. In 1992, he was convicted of sexual battery with a weapon or force and false imprisonment of a child. He was released from prison in 2001.

Officials confirmed Lacy was the brother of former super-middleweight boxing champion Jeff Lacy.

CONTINUED AT:

www.denverpost.com/search/ci_17188427?obref=obnetwork

[firstamendment]

But you'll notice they say those two officers tried to negotiate with Patterson. Why didn't they bring in a member of Patterson's family to talk to him? That is a typical tactic to bring in someone with an emotional connection with the person.

And just because he had to regain control of his gun doesn't mean he wasn't acting in self defense. Just the opposite actually. Like I stated earlier, I believe he shot at Wyman first because Wyman was on scene holding the spotlight on Patterson. Why not take out the light source that reveals your position, then fire in the direction of the shots? To someone trained, these are not conscious decisions one makes, but rather instinctual.

Did Patterson kill Wyman? Yes, he did, that is not in dispute. But did he intend to kill? Did he ever have intent to fire on anyone other than himself that night? I don't think it is fair to label this man a murderer or worse, a cop killer, because of poor tactics employed by the Sheriff's Office that night. This should not have turned into a gun battle started by the police. There was no reason for it. By waiting him out, what is the worst that could happen? Patterson taking his own life? No, instead they provoke a man who is already in a heightened emotional state. A man with a gun who is trained in how to use it. When you poke a growling dog with a stick, sometimes he'll bite ya.

That case in Florida was a bit different because they were dealing with someone they already knew to be dangerous. That is a tragic situation but varies in that the suspect did fire first, therefore an armed response was not only appropriate but necessary.

[bobbbiez]

Just have a few things to say and I'm out of this conversation and you can carry on. I don't care how much training one has because each situation is different when dealing with people holding guns where NO ONE has knowledge of what their intentions are. Some times having to make decisions and most often split-second decisions can be the wrong ones. Y'all are forgetting being human has to factor into that also. No amount of training guarantees the situation will turn out to your perfection at all times. Very easy to sit there and criticize when you are not in that position.

You talk like police officers are programed robots without human instincts, fear, panic and error. They are human beings doing a job the majority of us don't want but yet want them to do it to perfection.

What really is upsetting is that Dave posted an article about three officers doing their job and in that one officer was killed and two others were wounded but your conversation continues without a word of sympathy for those officers and their families, but yet you show more concern for Patterson who also killed an officer. Whether or not it was the right procedure Patterson still killed the officer. You have a right to your opinions but in giving those opinions do not lose sight of you are talking about the deaths of people just trying to do a good job in protecting you. Leaves me alot to think about.

ps: If you'd like to carry on this conversation with me come join me at the "Tom Lindsey, Brothers Forever Ride" this Saturday at the Utica Aud at 10am when the riders start out and then meet me at their return at the Brewery at 1:30pm. Besides talking with me it'll be a sight you will never forget.