View Full Version : Robin Sage Trial to Start
af_rigger
10-07-2009, 09:03
Robin Sage Trial to Start
BY JOHN CHAPPELL: STAFF WRITER
Next week in federal court, a lawsuit heads to trial over a tragic incident in which a Moore County sheriff's deputy shot and killed one soldier and wounded another during a Special Forces training exercise called Robin Sage.
Motions are to be heard this week, with jury trial to begin Oct. 13 in Greensboro at the federal courthouse for the Middle District of North Carolina. The suit seeks damages from the Moore County Sheriff's Department and the county's insurer.
At issue is whether or not then-Deputy Randall Butler used excessive force in an altercation stemming from confrontation with two soldiers in civilian clothes and their volunteer trainer who thought Butler stopped their vehicle as part of a training scenario. Butler thought his life in danger from three armed men about to kill him. The soldiers' guns were loaded with blanks.
"This case arises out of tragic events that unfolded on the day of Feb. 23, 2002, in Moore County," the federal court judge said in a statement of the case. "On that date, defendant Moore County Deputy Sheriff Randall Butler shot and killed Tallas Tomeny and shot and seriously wounded plaintiff Phelps, both Green Beret Special Forces soldiers."
Phelps, Butler and a man named Charles Leiber directly witnessed the incident. While their testimony concerning the events they witnessed is similar in some ways, it is also different as to certain important facts, the court said.
A jury will decide whose account to believe and what the true facts are.
According to court documents, as part of the Army's Robin Sage training exercise, Phelps and Tomeny left their base camp that day for reconnaissance on a railroad bridge. They received a ride from Leiber, a civilian assisting the military in his free time.
Leiber was driving a Ford Ranger pickup truck with Tomeny giving directions in the passenger seat. Tomeny had a backpack containing various items, including the two halves of an M-4 assault rifle.
Phelps rode in the bed of the truck with a tackle box and two fishing rods. All wore plain clothes. The zipper to the main compartment with the M-4 rifle was covered by a flap, and Phelps maintains that Tomeny never opened that zipper.
Whether he did or not is one of the facts at issue in the case. Butler says he opened it himself and saw an assault weapon in the pack, according to court records. But Phelps contends that Butler eventually got upset and grabbed the bag away from Tomeny.
At one point, Tomeny was pulled off balance toward Butler, who was able to wrest the backpack from Tomeny with his left hand and throw it across his body to the ground near the front driver's side wheel of the patrol car. He also pushed Tomeny back. Phelps claims that Butler then drew his pistol with the safety off. Tomeny had his hands up. Butler reholstered the pistol, pulled his pepper spray, and began spraying Tomeny in the face, again according to Phelps' sworn statement in court documents.
Tomeny backed away, toward the passenger side of the truck, while screaming and cursing. The truck had side boards on the bed rails and Tomeny largely passed out of Phelps' view behind the boards as he backed up. Phelps, not wanting to be pepper sprayed, stood, jumped out of the back of the truck, and ran to grab the backpack, according to the statement.
He swore that he still believed that all of this was part of the training exercise and that he intended to grab the backpack and run to the edge of the woods to distance himself from Butler and formulate a plan.
Instead, he said heard two rapid shots behind him. He tried to stop and turn, but slipped on the wet pavement and fell. After landing on all fours, he saw Butler turn to face him and he heard two more shots.
One of those last two shots hit him in the right arm, and the other hit him in the chest. The bullet that hit his chest punctured his diaphragm, liver and intestines before lodging in his left hip. As Phelps lay on the ground, Butler approached him. Phelps cursed him and asked how he could not know they were in the military. Butler allegedly told him to shut up and stay down or he would shoot him again.
Tomeny, shot in the chest, was pronounced dead at the scene. Phelps was hospitalized for 13 days.
'On a Recon'
Leiber's account differs at the point that he and Butler entered the patrol car. Leiber claims that Butler questioned him as to where he lived and what he was doing, and he replied that he was from Pineland and that the men in his truck were two migrant workers who were going fishing, court documents say.
He claimed to have picked them up in Pineland. In response to further questioning, he stated that the men were doing "recon."
He testified in his deposition that when it "appeared" Tomeny was not going to show any more of the contents of the bag, Butler pulled out his pistol and then reholstered it. He states that Tomeny responded by pulling an orange from the bag. Leiber said he did not remember anyone opening the main compartment of the backpack.
Leiber's deposition states that he does not remember ever observing Tomeny's hands reach behind his back. This is one of the main points at issue between his statement and that of Butler.
According to Leiber, when the pepper spray seemed to run out, Butler immediately pulled his pistol and fired two shots at Tomeny. At that time, Phelps jumped off the truck and ran.
Butler's account differs markedly on certain key facts that will be before the jury if the case proceeds to trial. According to his statement, he was on patrol in northern Moore County that day.
While he had general knowledge that the military sometimes trained in Moore County, he said he did not know of the existence of the Robin Sage exercise, did not know its details, and did not know that any exercise was being conducted in the area that day.
Butler said he had, however, heard that there had recently been a series of property crimes in the area, including burglaries of homes and outbuildings.
Because of four factors -- the unsolved property crimes in the area, seeing the same truck in the area earlier in the day with a person riding in the back and apparently asleep in cold weather, the actions of the passenger, and the turns that the truck made after being sighted and followed -- Butler became suspicious and pulled the truck over.
According to Butler, Leiber told him first that he and his passengers were going fishing, then added that they were migrant workers. When asked which it was, Leiber allegedly replied that he was trying to find work for migrant workers. Butler thought this answer to be odd because it was winter, and there were no crops in the fields. Finally, Leiber told Butler he was "on a recon."
At this point, Butler left Leiber in the car and approached Tomeny's window. As Tomeny rolled down the window, Butler said in his statement, that he noticed the backpack on the floor of the truck and felt that Tomeny was uncomfortable and trying to hide the bag. He asked Tomeny to step out and show him the contents of the bag. He also noticed that Phelps continued sleeping or pretending to sleep and considered this suspicious under the circumstances.
'Kill Him Now'
Butler's sworn deposition says he asked Tomeny to open the pack and Tomeny said he would, but did not. Butler testified in his deposition that Tomeny acted oddly by unzipping the bag halfway and then quickly zipping it closed again. Butler says he then unzipped the backpack himself and saw what he thought were two machine guns in the bag.
After Butler saw the guns, he and Tomeny struggled over the bag, the statement says. Butler was able to take the bag from Tomeny and throw it near the front, driver's side tire of his patrol car. When he turned back, he claims that he felt and saw Tomeny's hands near the pistol on his right hip. He then drew the gun with his right hand and pushed Tomeny away with his left while commanding him to stay back.
When Tomeny did move away, Butler reholstered his gun, but he states that Tomeny moved toward him again, he said in the deposition. Butler then attempted to pepper spray Tomeny. Butler said he believed that Tomeny turned his head, causing the pepper spray to miss him. He claims that he heard Tomeny yell, "It's too late. It's too late, you're dead."
According to Butler' statement, Tomeny then began pointing and saying "You're dead. You're dead." Finally, Tomeny yelled to Phelps, "Go ahead. Shoot him. Kill him. Kill him." He also screamed "Kill him now."
Phelps then got up from the truck, jumped out and rushed toward the backpack. Butler believed that Phelps was going for the guns and that he actually saw part of the guns come out of the bag as Phelps grabbed it and turned to face him. He stated that he also saw, with his peripheral vision, Tomeny reaching behind his back as if to pull something from his pants. Butler claims he warned Phelps verbally but, when Phelps did not respond, he then shot Phelps.
After shooting Phelps, he turned to face Tomeny. Because Tomeny was still reaching behind his back as if for a weapon, he shot Tomeny and retreated to the back of the car where he could cover Leiber while calling for backup.
Based on their version of the facts, Phelps and Tomeny's father filed suit against Butler in both his individual and official capacities, Lane Carter in his official capacity and Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Maryland.
Carter was not actually sheriff at the time of the shootings. However, because the suit is only against him in his official capacity, he is the named defendant in the suit, which is really against the Sheriff's Office.
Contact John Chappell at 783-5841 or by e-mail at jchappell@thepilot.com.
This is a piss-ass shame,, an accident that should not have happened..
RIP Warrior, Vaya con Dios..
The Reaper
10-07-2009, 11:12
I interviewed some of the people involved with this incident.
Most of the accounts track, with Deputy Butler's being the primary one that differs. The military investigation tap danced around the facts; IMHO, to avoid embarassing anyone in the civilian community.
Personally, I think he is lying. Everybody I know in Moore County there for more than a year knows about Robin Sage.
I hate to see the suit against the Sheriff's Department, Lane Carter is a good man, but his predecessor hired Butler and put him on the road with a gun.
Damn shame regardless, and led to a lot of changes.
TR
af_rigger
10-07-2009, 11:27
TR what is even more amazing Butler is now working for the Lee County Sheriffs Department. Lee County has a new Sheriff and he brought Butler aboard. I made a point to let some of the Cadre know about this because their was talk about expanding Sage out into Lee County.
The Reaper
10-07-2009, 11:43
TR what is even more amazing Butler is now working for the Lee County Sheriffs Department. Lee County has a new Sheriff and he brought Butler aboard. I made a point to let some of the Cadre know about this because their was talk about expanding Sage out into Lee County.
A friend of my wife said that she dated Butler a long time ago, and that this was not unexpected. She also said that he had left Lee County to come to Moore.
Maybe it is time for him to quit carrying a badge and a gun. This suit may see to that.
TR
Snaquebite
10-07-2009, 12:04
I was acting as G Chief to the ODA in the adjacent AO when this ocurred. As a result was privy to a lot of the first hand info.
I believe believe Tomeny's father is a retired USAF General. This lawsuit has been in the works for a while.
Here's a copy of the unpublished appeal.
http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/061929.U.pdf
I also add that according to the MSG in charge of that area. They even tried to bribe the Sheriff with the fake Pineland Money. The whole situation is bizarre.
We dealt with the Police in Fayetteville during our off post hits down town. These were the final hits for the SFAUC Course. The police were actively looking for the Students during their Recon phase. They were part of the exercise. If caught they were to be arrested by the Police. Police and students had Sims Guns. The Police taking part had a Red Flag attached to the antenna of their vehicle. So did the Students. Police only pulled them over if they had a reason to.
One thing we always told the Students. If a Cop pulls you over. He doesn't have a Red Flag on his Antenna. Doesn't have a Sims mask onwhen he gets out. Do not pull out your Sims Gun and engage. You will get shot.
Snaquebite
10-07-2009, 12:26
They even tried to bribe the Sheriff with the fake Pineland Money.
This was part of the original testimony...
greenberetTFS
10-07-2009, 13:23
It's just a shame that the young man was killed and the other shot.....:( From what I've read so far,Butler should get what's coming to him........:mad: He's a LEO who should not be wearing a badge or carrying a gun.......:mad:
Bigb Teddy :munchin
I can remember when one law enforcement official was being interviewed in his office and he was stating that they did not know the guys were out there. Of course behind him on the wall were quite a few plaques that the unit had given him over the years thanking them.
Peregrino
10-07-2009, 21:18
With luck the family will get some justice. Not enough to compensate for the loss of a son but maybe enough to get a threat to civil society out of uniform and off the street.
Remington Raidr
10-08-2009, 06:11
and some questions are raised regarding the LEO involved, but I guess am thinking back to my younger days, a little thing called "roll call", where the oncoming shift was given information regarding events in the past 24 and the upcoming 8 hours. I would be interested to know if the LEO recieved any kind of heads up at roll call regarding Robin Sage. Is it possible that the agency didn't hold roll calls? Kind of an industry standard. Anyone?
... a little thing called "roll call", where the oncoming shift was given information regarding events in the past 24 and the upcoming 8 hours...........
How about just being aware of the local news?
Every time a Robin Sage starts it's in the local papers. All about gun fire, explosions, odd people running around, low flying aircraft at night, etc, etc, etc.
and some questions are raised regarding the LEO involved, but I guess am thinking back to my younger days, a little thing called "roll call", where the oncoming shift was given information regarding events in the past 24 and the upcoming 8 hours. I would be interested to know if the LEO recieved any kind of heads up at roll call regarding Robin Sage. Is it possible that the agency didn't hold roll calls? Kind of an industry standard. Anyone?
It is standard in large departments. But a small Town Sheriff department. He probably started his shift from his house. Most deputy's take there car Home after shift. Then start again the next day.
Remington Raidr
10-08-2009, 11:52
It is standard in large departments. But a small Town Sheriff department. He probably started his shift from his house. Most deputy's take there car Home after shift. Then start again the next day.
OK, that's what I was looking for, yeah he should have watched the news, but if it was at roll call it would be hard to say he didn't have any idea. I wasn't sure if all agencies did roll call. Tragedy.
Robin Sage Lawsuits Blame Army, Deputy For Shootings
By Drew Brooks, Staff writer
Moore County Deputy Randall Butler shot two Special Forces trainees - killing one - during a military training exercise in 2002. Now the deputy and the soldiers are asking the federal courts to decide who is to blame. Starting Tuesday, the U.S. District Court in Greensboro will hear the lawsuit filed by the surviving soldier and the dead soldier's estate, according to a lawyer involved in the case. That lawsuit, filed in March 2004, pits Stephen Phelps and the estate of Tallas Tomeny against the Moore County Sheriff's Office, including Sheriff Lane Carter, and former deputy Butler.
According to court documents, Phelps and Tomeny's estate are seeking unspecified damages for pain and suffering, lost income, funeral costs and court costs. They also are seeking punitive damages against Butler for his alleged "reckless indifference and callous disregard for the clearly defined rights" of the plaintiffs.
Butler's own lawsuit in the case is pending in federal court.
In that suit, filed in 2005, Butler alleges the Army was negligent by not informing the Sheriff's Office about the military training and failing to properly inform the exercise participants how to interact with law enforcement.
Butler's suit said that negligence resulted in the shootings and contributed to severe emotional distress and post-traumatic stress disorder suffered by Butler.
Butler is seeking a judgment that would award him $5 million plus court fees.
2-week exercise
The two soldiers were shot during Robin Sage, a two-week exercise in unconventional warfare that takes place across central North Carolina. The exercise - which has been staged every year since 1950 - is a final exam for soldiers going through Special Forces training.
Phelps, then a sergeant, and Tomeny, a first lieutenant, were with a civilian playing the role of a guerrilla in the exercise when their pickup was stopped by Butler.
Following the shootings, the Army, Moore County and State Bureau of Investigation officials agreed the soldiers probably thought that the deputy was also a role-player in the Special Forces training, and Butler, not knowing the two were part of a military exercise, feared for his life.
According to Butler's version of events as spelled out in his lawsuit, Phelps and Tomeny were riding in the back of a pickup on Acorn Ridge Road near Robbins when Butler stopped the vehicle because something seemed suspicious.
Reports at the time of the incident said the soldiers were conducting reconnaissance as part of their training mission.
Charles Lieber, a civilian participant in the exercise, was driving the truck.
Butler said in his lawsuit that he told Lieber to sit in his patrol car while he questioned Tomeny and searched the soldier's bag.
Inside the bag, the lawsuit says, Butler saw two machine guns.
According to the lawsuit, Butler immediately tossed the bag aside and Tomeny lunged at him, screaming to Phelps: "He's got a gun. Shoot him, shoot him."
Butler's suit says he shot Phelps because he appeared to be trying to get the machine guns and that he then shot Tomeny after a brief struggle because the soldier did not follow orders and appeared to be reaching for a gun. Phelps recovered. Tomeny died.
Butler said he was unaware of the role-playing exercise.
Soldiers' version
But the lawsuit that goes to trial Tuesday presents a different take on the episode.
That lawsuit says Butler stopped the soldiers' vehicle without cause and used deadly force without provocation. It said the soldiers thought Butler was participating in the exercise. The soldiers used code-words created for the exercise to indicate that they were participants.
The soldiers' suit contends that Butler shot Tomeny first, after pepper spraying him and without ever seeing a weapon, then shot Phelps as the latter tried to run away.
At no time did either man resist arrest or make any threats toward Butler, the lawsuit says.
The complaint also charges that the sheriff and the Sheriff's Office failed to inform and instruct deputies about the exercise.
In the years since Tomeny's death, officials have taken extra steps to publicize the exercise and communicate with local officials.
Glad Butler has a price for making everything right for himself.
Published: 05:18 PM, Tue Oct 13, 2009
http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/10/13/942629
Family reaches settlement in Robin Sage lawsuitBy Drew Brooks
Staff writer
GREENSBORO - The family of a Fort Bragg soldier killed during an Army training exercise in 2002 has settled with the defendants in a federal lawsuit.
The estate of Tallas Tomeny settled with the Moore County Sheriff's Office, including Sheriff Lane Carter and former deputy Randall Butler, and it withdrew from the civil case in which opening arguments are expected this afternoon.
The lawsuit alleges that Butler was reckless and negligent when he shot Tomeny and Stephen Phelps, who survived. The two were Special Forces trainees participating in Robin Sage, a two-week training exercise held across central North Carolina. The exercise is a final exam for soldiers going through the training.
Butler was cleared of wrongdoing by Army and state authorities following an investigation of the killing, but the civil suit filed in March 2004 asks a U.S. District Court judge to find that Butler acted with "reckless indifference and callous disregard for the clearly defined rights'' of the plaintiffs.
Phelps is seeking unspecified damages for pain and suffering, lost income, funeral costs and court costs. He is also seeking punitive damages against Butler.
Jury selection in the case is expected to wind up after today's lunch break and then lawyers from both sides are expected to present their opening arguments.
Judge William Osteen said he expects the trial to last until the end of next week.
During the 2002 exercise, Phelps, then a sergeant, and Tomeny, a first lieutenant, were with a civilian playing the role of a guerrilla in the exercise when their pickup was stopped by Butler.
The soldiers' suit contends that Butler shot Tomeny first, after pepper spraying him and without ever seeing a weapon, then shot Phelps as the latter tried to run away. The men had thought Butler was participating in the training exercise.
At no time did either man resist arrest or make any threats toward Butler, the lawsuit says.
Following the shootings, the Army, Moore County and State Bureau of Investigation officials agreed the soldiers probably thought the deputy was also a role-player in the Special Forces training, and Butler, not knowing the two were part of a military exercise, feared for his life. Butler has said he was unaware of the exercise.
According to Butler's version of events as spelled out in his lawsuit, Phelps and Tomeny were riding in the back of a pickup on Acorn Ridge Road near Robbins when Butler stopped the vehicle because something seemed suspicious.
Butler said in his lawsuit that he told a civilian to sit in his patrol car while he questioned Tomeny and searched the soldier's bag.
Inside the bag, the lawsuit says, Butler saw two machine guns.
According to the lawsuit, Butler immediately tossed the bag aside and Tomeny lunged at him, screaming to Phelps: "He's got a gun. Shoot him, shoot him.''
Butler's suit says he shot Phelps because he appeared to be trying to get the machine guns and that he then shot Tomeny after a brief struggle because the soldier did not follow orders and appeared to be reaching for a gun.
Butler has also filed a pending suit over the incident, alleging the Army was negligent by not informing the Sheriff's Office about the military training and failing to properly inform the exercise participants how to interact with law enforcement.
Butler's suit said that negligence resulted in the shootings and contributed to severe emotional distress and post-traumatic stress disorder suffered by Butler. He is seeking a judgment that would award him $5 million plus court fees.
Latest news.
Lawyer Tries To Discount Soldier's Story In Robin Sage Trial
Paul Woolverton, Fayetteville Observer, 16 Oct 2009
Former Green Beret Stephen Phelps spent much of Thursday trying to fend off a lawyer's attempts to undermine his story that a Moore County deputy had no grounds to shoot him and another soldier during a Special Forces training program in February 2002.
Phelps and the other soldier, First Lt. Tallas Tomeny, were shot by Deputy Randall Butler while participating in a Special Forces qualification course known as Robin Sage. Tomeny died, and Phelps was critically injured.
Phelps filed a civil lawsuit against Butler and the Sheriff's Office, saying Butler overreacted and used excessive force. Butler now works for the Lee County Sheriff's Office.
On cross examination Thursday, lawyer James Morgan got Phelps to retract some of his prior testimony about his encounter with Butler.
Morgan, who represents Butler and the Sheriff's Office, often put Phelps on the defensive over discrepancies between his testimony and what civilian and military investigators reported he said in the months following the shooting.
In Robin Sage, the students pretend to infiltrate a fictional country and use unconventional warfare to help local guerilla forces overthrow an oppressive government.
The fictional country, called Pineland, is actually 15 counties in central North Carolina. Local civilians volunteer to provide land and pretend to be involved in the insurgency the American soldiers are trying to help.
Some of the training happens in public, so the students sometimes encounter civilians who aren't taking part in the exercise and don't know what is going on.
Morgan said Butler didn't know that Tomeny, Phelps and a civilian volunteer driving them around were participating in Robin Sage. Morgan said Butler thought they were behaving suspiciously in an area where there had been burglaries, so he stopped them.
Phelps testified Wednesday and Thursday that the soldiers thought Butler was a volunteer helping the instructors test how they would handle an encounter with police.
Phelps was in the back of a pickup truck and watched while Butler had Tomeny opened a large knapsack on the tailgate. The knapsack held food, clothing and a partly disassembled military rifle.
The soldiers had no other firearms, Phelps said.
The civilian, Charles Leiber, was sitting in the front seat of Butler's patrol car, Phelps said.
Morgan challenged Phelps on how much he could see of the encounter. Phelps testified that he pretended to be asleep during much of it. Despite holding his head down, Phelps said he could see and hear Tomeny at the tailgate trying to persuade Butler that they could work together to make Pineland a better place and offered him bribes with fake Pineland currency that resembles Monopoly money.
Butler didn't respond to the entreaties and told Tomeny to open the knapsack's main compartment, which held the rifle, Phelps said. He said Tomeny stalled, holding the bag up and turning it over to pretend he couldn't find the zipper.
Morgan questioned Phelps on whether he could see that Tomeny never opened the outer compartment. Phelps has insisted that the compartment was never opened, while Butler says it was opened and that he saw what appeared to be two machine guns inside.
Phelps said Butler became agitated and snatched the bag from Tomeny's hands. The force carried Tomeny toward Butler, he said.
He said Butler tossed the bag behind him and drew his pistol on Tomeny.
At that point, "I perked up. I was watching what was going on" instead of pretending to sleep. Phelps said.
Tomeny put his hands up in a gesture of surrender, Phelps said, and Butler holstered his gun, brought out his pepper spray and used it.
Phelps said he took the opportunity to jump from the pickup bed, run toward a woods line and grab the knapsack along the way.
Phelps said he heard two gunshots. He quickly stopped, he said, turned around, and slipped and fell near the patrol car. He said he used both hands to break his fall, and the bag fell nearby. He said Butler shot him while he was on the ground.
Statements revealed
Morgan brought out statements from Army and civilian investigators who interviewed Phelps in the days after the shooting and again later.
According to their reports, Phelps said he went down on one knee, not down on his hands.
Also, in a re-enactment videotaped in April 2002 and shown to the jury Thursday, Phelps got down on one knee and held the knapsack in front of him after he turned around.
That differs from Butler's version of what happened. Butler says he saw Phelps come up from the cover of the patrol car and appear to be pulling the rifle from the knapsack, and that's when he shot Phelps.
Phelps said he doesn't remember some of the interviews because they happened in the days after the shooting and his emergency surgery. He said he was taking so much morphine and other drugs for the pain that his memory from that time is hazy at best.
He said the officers and police who interviewed him may have misinterpreted what he said.
When he helped make the video re-enactment, he said, he didn't want to run or throw himself to the ground because he was still recovering from the bullet wound and the surgical incision.
Testimony from Phelps continues this morning at the federal courthouse in Greensboro.
http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/10/16/943560
AngelsSix
10-17-2009, 15:25
The SSgt. that survived the incident used to live down the street from me and I was told that he hated cops; if that was the case, I can understand why. As a rookie I was told where he lived as a precaution in case we ever needed to respond to the area.
We got emails well in advance of Robin Sage letting us know it was going to be occurring, even if there were no events scheduled in our area. I have only witnessed Robin Sage vehicles in Southern Pines/Aberdeen one time. I have never seen any in the Hurst.
I have to admit I am with the majority of opinions here, that the deputy was definitely wrong.
NousDefionsDoc
10-17-2009, 16:55
Morgan said Butler thought they were behaving suspiciously in an area where there had been burglaries, so he stopped them.
And there you have it, the crux of the issue. Fuckin' Terry stops. "Suspiciously" how? From what I read previously because "he saw the same truck twice"? So now because I drive through an area twice a cop can pull me over? What the hell has become of this country?
That hick with a badge had no business stopping them in the first place.
Terry stops are unConstitutional and I don't give a rat's ass what the SCOTUS says.
And there you have it, the crux of the issue. Fuckin' Terry stops. "Suspiciously" how? From what I read previously because "he saw the same truck twice"? So now because I drive through an area twice a cop can pull me over? What the hell has become of this country?
That hick with a badge had no business stopping them in the first place.
Terry stops are unConstitutional and I don't give a rat's ass what the SCOTUS says.
NDD, gonna have to disagree with the above. Terry stops are indeed constitutional and when used properly and within the law(key phrase) an effective LE tool. The totality of the circumstances and recent crime patterns are affirmed in case law as valid ingredients to reasonable suspicion and eventually probable cause. It takes training, intelligence and experience for an LEO to understand and implement it. An experienced officer will also try and observe some vehicle code violation (however minor)in order to build his case for the stop. Having solid concrete probable cause for a stop along with the totality of the circumstances and recent crime trends starts building enough probable cause for a stop. Police interaction from a mere encounter all the way up to an arrest can occur in a second just like a deadly force situation can happen in a blink of an eye. The fact that a soldier was killed indicates (to me) that the system broke down (most likely on the LE side) and a horrible accident transpired.
cback0220
10-17-2009, 18:02
The SSgt. that survived the incident used to live down the street from me and I was told that he hated cops; if that was the case, I can understand why. As a rookie I was told where he lived as a precaution in case we ever needed to respond to the area.
We got emails well in advance of Robin Sage letting us know it was going to be occurring, even if there were no events scheduled in our area. I have only witnessed Robin Sage vehicles in Southern Pines/Aberdeen one time. I have never seen any in the Hurst.
I have to admit I am with the majority of opinions here, that the deputy was definitely wrong.
I ran all around Southern Pines, Aberdeen, and Pinehurst in Robin Sage.
NousDefionsDoc
10-17-2009, 18:11
NDD, gonna have to disagree with the above. Terry stops are indeed constitutional and when used properly and within the law(key phrase) an effective LE tool. The totality of the circumstances and recent crime patterns are affirmed in case law as valid ingredients to reasonable suspicion and eventually probable cause. It takes training, intelligence and experience for an LEO to understand and implement it. An experienced officer will also try and observe some vehicle code violation (however minor)in order to build his case for the stop. Having solid concrete probable cause for a stop along with the totality of the circumstances and recent crime trends starts building enough probable cause for a stop. Police interaction from a mere encounter all the way up to an arrest can occur in a second just like a deadly force situation can happen in a blink of an eye. The fact that a soldier was killed indicates (to me) that the system broke down (most likely on the LE side) and a horrible accident transpired.
I know you have to. Effectiveness has nothing to do with it. We can agree to disagree as long as you understand that I am right. The Constitution does not say "unless a cop has a 'reasonable' suspicion."
I'm not going to get in a war about this and my issue on the subject is not with cops, it's with the SCOTUS - the single biggest problem in this country right now IMO.
I speak from experience as a former police officer in Oregon who has a solid concept of the rule of law pertaining to detaining and search/seizure.
In order for an officer to stop a person either in a car or on foot he has to be able to articulate that he has "reasonable suspicion" that a crime has occurred. He can then make the stop based on the premise of investigating that crime. From reading the above articles it doesn't sound like the officer articulated very well that a crime had occurred. A truck seen repeatedly in the same area as a series of burglaries does not reach the threshold of reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred. I would hope that there is more to the story than that or beyond the officer's actions after the stop there is also an illegal detention. Of course the other way is to observe some sort of violation (traffic or otherwise). I tend to agree with Five-O that pretext stops are not a bad thing. I pulled plenty of dope and guns out of cars because I found a car that I was interested in and then found the violation to pull it over.
All that being said, we can Monday morning quarterback this thing all day long, but a soldier died and another one was injured because "a hick with a badge" (Hope you don't mind if I steal your line NDD) couldn't pull his head out of his ass and pay attention to what was going on in his district. In my mind there's no excuse for not knowing that Sage was going on there.
We can agree to disagree as long as you understand that I am right.
:cool:....fair enough. Regardless, there is no excuse whatsoever for the local and state police not to be aware of the training and not to get that information down to the patrol guys. How and why Butler was not aware of the training (if he is being honest) is of great interest.
Reasonable Suspicion is the key word. Unfortunately this term is up for interpretation on a case to case basis and differs in the mind of each police officer. Like Five-O said it is a good tool for LEO's when used PROPERLY. Too many officers create their own "reasonable suspicion" and violate some peoples' rights when doing so.
I believe it boils down to the quality of the officer. At our department there is never an issue of this nature with the better officers. With others....there are times that I cringe reading some of the reports. Put quality policemen on the roads and these kinds of incidents will disappear.
Its just tragic that this thing happened in the first place.
Phelps got shot in the back I looked at his bullet wounds in his 2ed robin sage class. For the rest of the story I don't think anyone will know the full truth I wish the deputy had a dash cam in his car at the time.
The Reaper
10-18-2009, 10:17
Phelps got shot in the back I looked at his bullet wounds in his 2ed robin sage class. For the rest of the story I don't think anyone will know the full truth I wish the deputy had a dash cam in his car at the time.
Funny you mention that.
He allegedly had a dash cam, and the tape ran out after the stop but before the shootings.
There is no way he could not have known about RS, he had been a cop in this area for years.
Why would a disassembled M-4 in a rucksack and non-compliance with verbal instruction present sufficient threat to justify employment of lethal force?
TR
Team Sergeant
10-18-2009, 10:27
Funny you mention that.
He allegedly had a dash cam, and the tape ran out after the stop but before the shootings.
There is no way he could not have known about RS, he had been a cop in this area for years.
Why would a disassembled M-4 in a rucksack and non-compliance with verbal instruction present sufficient threat to justify employment of lethal force?
TR
If that is true I wonder why the FBI didn't get involved...... not that I'm saying some small LEO agency would ever attempt to cover up a bad shooting, but it would look good with a seal of approval from a higher authority.
Those darn dash-cams just seem to stop working at the most "critical" moments. Funny how I see a whole lot of dash-cam footage of "bad" guys bullets ripping through police car windshields and those dash-cams continue to work great!
Funny you mention that.
He allegedly had a dash cam, and the tape ran out after the stop but before the shootings.
There is no way he could not have known about RS, he had been a cop in this area for years.
Why would a disassembled M-4 in a rucksack and non-compliance with verbal instruction present sufficient threat to justify employment of lethal force?
TR
If he did know about RS then wtf was he thinking? Did he get rejected by the military, the Army, SF? Did he have an axe to grid? Did his wife bang a soldier?? Maybe he is partucularly dim. If he worked the area for years then it just does not make any sense...especially when the LT tried to bribe him with Pineland currency thinking it was part of RS.
As far as deadly force...the disassembled M-4 and verbal non-compliance obviously does not justify deadly force but it would certainly get my antenna up and the juices flowing rather quick. I always think +1.....if a bad guy has a gun then he has two and if he has two then three and so on. Should have never got to that point.
The Reaper
10-19-2009, 09:49
Phelps told me that during the incident, Tomeny was wearing an OD t-shirt with "1LT Tomeny" stenciled on it.
Military haircuts, Pineland currency, uniform items and rank, an M-4, in the RS AOR with a local asset, how far does this have to go for Butler to put two and two together?
TR
Those darn dash-cams just seem to stop working at the most "critical" moments. Funny how I see a whole lot of dash-cam footage of "bad" guys bullets ripping through police car windshields and those dash-cams continue to work great!
TS,
I'm not privy to any of the actions here w/ the sad shooting, other than "what I heard', but With regards to dash cams:
1) Just like any critical piece of equipment, they DO have a tendency to fail at the worst possible times. I've had that exp first hand; and,
2) I spent a couple of years as an instructor at FLETC where a HUGE number of tapes flow thru. One incident in particular made an impression on me, involving a police shooting and cam coverage. Officers responded to an indent and on one camera you would swear the officer simply gunned down an innocent man. Change angles, from a second car and you see the weapon the perp was carrying low when the officer engaged and the shooting was clearly justified.
As with any "silent witness" people place a lot of faith in them and they can (and do) mislead. In the Rodney King tape (not a dash cam) the media played edited versions which in part, led to riots - there may be something up w/ this Deputy's camera, but if they destroyed the tape, I suspect the Bureau would already be involved. Just my 2 cents.
v/r
phil
Piece of dental floss looped around the dash cam fuse does wonders to make sure it stops when the driver wants it to. Not saying it was done in this case but there are some LEO's that have done it in the past. Taught by the best......
Another example is audio/video on a hotel room..... When the entry team goes in someone kicks the power cord as they run out...... Accidents happen..:D
AngelsSix
10-19-2009, 18:47
I DO NOT believe that there was a reasonable level of force used in this case, is what it all boils down to me here.
As an LEO, after you spray someone in the face with OC, they typically back away and stop fighting. OC is no joke, I can personally attest to that. From witness statements, the gentleman was running away from the area, NOT a reason to use deadly force. The only time deadly force is authorized against an "escapee" is when they are a prisoner and are using a deadly weapon as a means of escape. Last time I checked, you don't shoot anyone in the back, period.
It's a good thing that I am not on the jury.
"Volunteer's testimony backs soldier in ....."
From The Fayetteville Observer
http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/10/20/944650
".....Then, Leiber said, Butler dropped the can, backed off from Tomeny, drew his gun and fired.
"Pow! Pow! Just like that. Right there," Leiber said, standing and raising his arm like he was firing a gun, then turning and firing again. His voice boomed through the courtroom......."
Phelps, meanwhile, had jumped from the truck and started to run away, Leiber said. Butler turned and shot him, he said.
:mad:
Richard
..... The only time deadly force is authorized against an "escapee" is when they are a prisoner and are using a deadly weapon as a means of escape. Last time I checked, you don't shoot anyone in the back, period.
It's a good thing that I am not on the jury.
There is no "perfect answer" in UoF scenarios and I am not taking sides. My understanding is that state law is often more restrictive than the federal standard (on the converse side, state law can never fall below federal 4th Amend protections). I do not pretend to know the N.C. UofF statute.
Tenn v. Garner (federal standard) held that where an officer has p/c to believe that a suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not unreasonable to prevent escape by use of deadly force. The rules (under federal law are clear)
The offier is not required to be in fear for his life
The crime is not required to be a felony (but must be serious - a crime of violence)
A warning prior to using deadly force is not required, but is encouraged.
The officer need not exhaust lesser forms of force before reverting to deadly force.
There is no duty on the officer to retreat.
Generally you can't shoot to stop someone from fleeing simply because the crime is a felony. We don't shoot drug dealers (another time for that!).
If the officer can articulate p/c to believe that if allowed to escape, the escapee poses a threat of death or seroius physical harm to citizens or officers, then under the federal standard the officer can use deadly force.
So for instance, you are investigating a Ted Bundy sort of person, you have his description, and respond to a call of unk disturb. As you enter the residence you observe a female victim, unclothed and screaming 'help me' and witness a naked Ted dive out the window. In my opinion and I think the federal law is on your side: you can articulate sufficient p/c that if Ted is allowed to escape, he will rape/kill again. Under these facts the officer can shoot a naked Ted Bundy in the back in order to stop his fleeing.
We've got many documented situations where the bad guys have used force until they tire or they are out of bullets. If they don't raise their hands to surrender and instead turn to run, they can (in fact, probably should) be stopped with deadly force.
I'm very sad for what happened and I always gave the benefit of the doubt to the soldier - and to the cop. This case bothers me a lot and hopefully the truth will become clear as the case progresses in the Court.
Sorry for the hijack
v/r
phil
We've got many documented situations where the bad guys have used force until they tire or they are out of bullets. If they don't raise their hands to surrender and instead turn to run, they can (in fact, probably should) be stopped with deadly force.
I see in the above case, But butler never even interacted with phelps, no crime was commited by phelps. The Lt. Started to struggle for control of the bag. Phelps see's him get shot while unarmed. Jumps from the truck tries to run away slips on the pavement and then gets shot threw the arm and in the back. :mad:
There is no "perfect answer"
The rules (under federal law are clear)
The offier is not required to be in fear for his life
The crime is not required to be a felony (but must be serious - a crime of violence)
A warning prior to using deadly force is not required, but is encouraged.
The officer need not exhaust lesser forms of force before reverting to deadly force.
There is no duty on the officer to retreat.
Sorry for the hijack
v/r
phil
But within any group of 25 or more professionals, one of them probably should not be there, regardless of the profession, Doctors, lawyers, School Teachers, Soldiers, Police Officers...
These so called "bad apples" however tend to move on and find work elswhere - it is amazing.
This guy Butler had many chances to have a better outcome - but above all, he couild have called somebody...
I mention all this because this hit very close to home for me 3 years ago -
(See below)
Dallas Officer Fired for Using Deadly Force permalink
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Story by nbc5i.com
Police said on Thursday they have fired a fellow officer for using deadly force.
The officer, Michael Tayem, was fired for using deadly force on 31-year-old Jason Pabis, who died after being shot during a scuffle outside an East Dallas apartment over the Memorial Day weekend.
Chief David Kunkle said he decided the officer, who was off-duty and working security at the time of the shooting, did not follow basic procedure. The officer said Pabis was drunk and disorderly and charged at him.
"Our deadly force policy is very strict," said Dallas Police Department spokesman Rick Watson. "It lays out that officers should take reasonable alternatives before they use deadly force."
The attorney for Pabis' family said Pabis was indeed drunk, but noted Pabis was unarmed and said the autopsy showed he was shot four times, including twice in the back.
"It could be he was running away and got shot some more," the attorney said. "We don't know. We need to investigate further."
Kunkle also on Thursday fired a 24-year veteran, Sgt. John McCaghren, alleging he failed to obey his supervisor and didn't show up to work.
Both officers have the right to appeal.
"The chief has made it no secret, from the day he came on, he said accountability was at the top of his list," Watson said. "He expects officers, including himself, from the rookiest rookie to himself, to be accountable for their actions."
Copyright 2006 by nbc5i.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Just to continue with the Hijack
Jason worked with me at Nokia in Fort Worth - we were on a quality team, had the same boss and shared the same office area. - his desk was 10 feet from mine. He was a free living, young guy, who drove a Jeep with a cavis top and without doors, all year round. We never knew he was such a drinker though.
He died about 9:30 on a Saturday morning all he was wearing when he was shot and killed was a pair of red baithing truncks, no shoes or shirt, noothing. But he was drunk - been partying all night and was not going to stop just because the sun came up.
The officer was about 5' 4" - Jason was just shorter than me and I'm 5' 10".
I know that our department was so stunned by this that little or no work was done that week following. There is so much more to this - on the back side, but I won't go into it - it is not relevent. But again - it did not have to happen. the officer should have been better trained - drunk people deserve to get locked up - not shot and killed.
Sorry for the continued Hijack.
I see in the above case, But butler never even interacted with phelps, no crime was commited by phelps. The Lt. Started to struggle for control of the bag. Phelps see's him get shot while unarmed. Jumps from the truck tries to run away slips on the pavement and then gets shot threw the arm and in the back. :mad:
7624U,
That may be one of the reasons that the Court refused to grant qualified immunity to the officer? I don't know, I wasn't there.
From a strictly legal standpoint, all use of force is analyzed from the perspective of a 4th Amendment Seizure. The use of force must be "objectively reasonable" based upon the 'totality of the circumstances" (Graham v. Connor) - deadly force has some futher considerations as outlined above in Tenn v Garner.
The courts have taken the approach that an officer should not have to wait until he is shot/hit/cut before he/she can use force.
The courts have held that the officer doesn't have to be right - just that the officer's actions are reasonalbe from an objective standpoint.
I'm not saying what the Deputy did was appropriate. But we are looking at this in hindsight. If the evidence were to come out that the deputy thought the two SF soldiers were "burglars", "casing a farm" and working as a team, and if there were some sort of conversation that was inconsistent with the soldiers being in the area for only lawful purposes, and if he saw a firearm, and if one member of the team resisted and attempted to take the firearm, and "in the heat of battle" so to speak, he thought (under the facts I've just put together for the sake of argument) the other soldier might be getting a firearm - or trying to escape; Well, a jury could find that use of force reasonable by an objective standard. Again, I'm not saying that is what happened, I wasn't there.
There are some studies that indicate burglars are a particularly dangereous class of felons, especially those that break into residential dwellings. More than often they are armed with some sort of device or weapon, they will fight if cornered, and many engage in weird activity while inside the victim's house, including autoerotic behavior, stealing personal clothing, especially underwear, and urgent bowel movements. If the deputy was investigating what he thought to be armed burglars - well he was on guard through out the entire stop. Not saying he was right, but he said that there had been a rash of burglaries.
A final point and I'll shut up - the original Terry v. Ohio decision, whether you like it or not, does not require that the crime have happened (been completed) Detective McFadden observed Terry, et al. "casing" the airline ticket office. The court felt that officers have a duty to prevent and to protect and a Terry stop may be initiated based upon a resonable suspicion that a crime is about to occur, is occuring, or has just occured. Again, if the facts as related by the Deputy indicate he though a burglary was about to happen, he was within his authority to make the stop.
God rest the Lieutenant's soul as well as give health to Phelps. Likewise, I don't imagine the Deputy is doing well after shooting two soldiers who were only engaged in training. This is the worst tradgedy.
I have a great deal of faith that the trial court will get to the bottom of this. The jury will find the true facts and the judge will apply the law. I pray for everyone involved.
v/r
phil
But within any group of 25 or more professionals, one of them probably should not be there, regardless of the profession, Doctors, lawyers, School Teachers, Soldiers, Police Officers...
These so called "bad apples" however tend to move on and find work elswhere - it is amazing.
This guy Butler had many chances to have a better outcome - but above all, he couild have called somebody...
I mention all this because this hit very close to home for me 3 years ago -
(See below)
Mitch, "spot on' re: bad apples. My job is to pick them.
But reading the thread, I recall the role player was back in the police car, he couldn't hear what was going on, because of the chatter on the police radio. I think he mentioned the Deputy was calling for back up at the point he got the bag? I could be wrong, but I seem to recall that amongst the facts,
Just to continue with the Hijack
Jason worked with me at Nokia in Fort Worth - we were on a quality team, had the same boss and shared the same office area. - his desk was 10 feet from mine. He was a free living, young guy, who drove a Jeep with a cavis top and without doors, all year round. We never knew he was such a drinker though.
He died about 9:30 on a Saturday morning all he was wearing when he was shot and killed was a pair of red baithing truncks, no shoes or shirt, noothing. But he was drunk - been partying all night and was not going to stop just because the sun came up.
The officer was about 5' 4" - Jason was just shorter than me and I'm 5' 10".
I know that our department was so stunned by this that little or no work was done that week following. There is so much more to this - on the back side, but I won't go into it - it is not relevent. But again - it did not have to happen. the officer should have been better trained - drunk people deserve to get locked up - not shot and killed.
Sorry for the continued Hijack.
Mitch,
I am sorry you lost your friend.
v/r
phil
JAGO
Yea I see where the law stands. I was just venting I talked to phelps and looked at his bullet wounds after the shooting took place. So I might be a alittle bias that butler was wrong in his actions. Good thing im not on the jury:D
JAGO
Yea I see where the law stands. I was just venting I talked to phelps and looked at his bullet wounds after the shooting took place. So I might be a alittle bias that butler was wrong in his actions. Good thing im not on the jury:D
7624U
I wish that sometime I could simply "get on a jury". I would love to sit back and watch the dynamics of the "12 angry men". It wouldn't matter if it were a criminal trial or a civil suit. What an education that would be. I get challenged when called.
My point in all of this, there are two sides to this story. I have never had the pleasure of serving with or even meeting "Richard" on this board, but I love the way he can bring the opposite perspective into all of it. I will never be as good as Richard, but that is all I was trying to do here.
If the case goes against the soldier, I note that the case is in U.S. District Court and not in some county court. If the results aren't to your liking, I submit that there probably wasn't any sort of "politics" in the jury's decision, that they simply followed the law as presented by the judge, and justice was done.
I don't know how it will go and I am sorry for both sides.
v/r
phil
Robin Sage exercise to begin
http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/10/25/946302
In the paper this morning.
Robin Sage exercise to begin
http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/10/25/946302
In the paper this morning.
Guess they better send special notices to local LEO's
Guess they better send special notices to local LEO's
They already Do every truck they use has a big Robin Sage sticker on it. Hard to say you dident know when it has that on the tailgate of every truck ;)
Remington Raidr
10-25-2009, 10:42
The deputy's brief was sealed, but attached is the reply brief filed the day before yesterday.
Robin Sage jury rules for soldier
http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/10/28/947102
From this morning's Fayetteville Observer. The Jury has spoken.
From one of the Jurors interviewed afterwards:
"Greg Harris of Hoke County said he found Phelps and Leiber more believable than Butler.
"Mr. Leiber's testimony was pretty strong," he said. "and Phelps - (the lawyers) couldn't get him crossed up. His story stayed the same throughout his testimony."
Harris said Butler's story changed".
The jury system worked. They got to the truth.
v/r
phil
It is great that the system worked......... This will not replace the lost career and life that it took but it now has the Truth out in the public eye.
The Reaper
10-28-2009, 07:15
At what point do departments find that employing a murderer with a history of excessive use of force is a bad idea?
Shouldn't Mr. Butler be looking for a new line of work?
TR
Peregrino
10-28-2009, 07:26
At what point do departments find that employing a murderer with a history of excessive use of force is a bad idea?
Shouldn't Mr. Butler be looking for a new line of work?
TR
Personally, I think Mr. Butler is a sheepdog that likes the taste of mutton. Maybe the next time he does something similar, the victim's family will be able to bankrupt his employer. If the system can be counted on to work twice.
At what point do departments find that employing a murderer with a history of excessive use of force is a bad idea?
Shouldn't Mr. Butler be looking for a new line of work?
TR
TR,
I have done "decerts" on Florida officers. I did a quick check, No Carolina has a similar system to regulate the "licenses" of officers.
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByChapter/Chapter_17C.html
Perhaps one of the lawyers involved in this case will report the Deputy's actions and this judgment to the No Carolina Criminal Justice Education and Training Standards Commission?
Murder is generally defined as the unlawfull killing of a human being with malice aforethought. I doubt that scienter element can be proven. However, the jury's verdict establishes excessive use of force - which I assume in No. Carolina is in violation of the Commission's rules and therefore grounds for revocation of his certification.
v/r
phil
craigepo
10-28-2009, 08:47
I attach a copy of the federal jury instruction on excessive force cases for persons injured before incarceration. This is called the "verdict director", and is part of the package of written instructions given to the jury. The jury then bases its verdict upon the instruction.
After reading the previous discussions on what is "excessive force", I think you will find that the federal jury instructions make it pretty easy for a jury, having heard the evidence, to come up with a reasonable verdict. Please note that the Court has to clean up the instruction prior to giving a "clean" instruction to the jurors. Also, this is the model instruction for all federal district courts in the 8th federal circuit. However, federal law is the same, and all jury instructions will be similar to that stated below.
Cool thing about being a judge---lawyers and cops bicker over what the law ought to be. Judges tell you what the law is.
4.10 EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE - ARREST OR OTHER SEIZURE OF
PERSON - BEFORE CONFINEMENT - FOURTH AMENDMENT
Your verdict must be for the plaintiff [and against defendant __________]1 [here generally describe the claim]2 if all the following elements have been proved3:
First, the defendant [here describe an act such as "struck, hit, kicked, or shot"]4 the plaintiff in the act of [arresting or stopping]5 the plaintiff, and
Second, the use of such force was excessive because it was not reasonably necessary to [here describe the purpose for which force was used such as "arrest the plaintiff," or "take the plaintiff into custody," or "stop the plaintiff for investigation"], and
Third, as a direct result, the plaintiff was damaged,6 and
[Fourth, the defendant was acting under color of state law.]7
In determining whether such force, [if any]8 was "excessive," you must consider such factors as the need for the application of force, the relationship between the need and the amount of force that was used, the extent of the injury inflicted, and whether a reasonable officer on the scene, without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, would have used such force under similar circumstances. [You should keep in mind that the decision about how much force to use often must be made in circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly changing.]9 [Deadly force10 may be used only if it is reasonably believed necessary to [(apprehend a dangerous, fleeing felon) (prevent a significant threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others)].11 A warning must be given, if feasible, before deadly force may be used.] You must consider whether the officer's actions are reasonable in the light of the facts and circumstances confronting the officer [without regard to the officer's own state of mind, intention or motivation].12
If any of the above elements has not been proved, then your verdict must be for the defendant.
[“Deadly force” is force intended or reasonably likely to cause death or serious physical injury.]1
greenberetTFS
10-28-2009, 08:50
Great news ..............:D:D:D
Big Teddy :munchin
Phelps got shot in the back I looked at his bullet wounds in his 2ed robin sage class. For the rest of the story I don't think anyone will know the full truth I wish the deputy had a dash cam in his car at the time.
Why did he go though again? Phelps (18C) and I went through the whole Q together. In fact, me and another 18C (former cop) talked to Phelps about filing a law suit shortly after he got shot.
Good for Phelps. I remember when he walked across the stage for graduation and he got a standing ovation from every person in the audience. In fact, I got that on video since I had my buddy tape record my graduation.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/ap_soldier_lawsuit_102809/
Jury awards at least $750,000 to former soldier
The Associated Press
Posted : Wednesday Oct 28, 2009 9:04:35 EDT
GREENSBORO, N.C. — A former Army sergeant wounded during a military training exercise was awarded at least $750,000 in his lawsuit against the Moore County Sheriff’s Office and the former deputy who shot him.
The Fayetteville Observer reported that the federal jury in Greensboro awarded the money to former Army Sgt. Stephen Phelps, who was injured in the February 2002 shooting that killed another soldier. He had sued the sheriff’s office and former Deputy Randall Butler.
“I was happy that the truth finally came out,” Phelps said after the verdict was read Tuesday night.
The jury awarded $650,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 or $200,000 in punitive damages Tuesday night. Phelps’ lawyer, Carlos Mahoney, had sought $1.2 million.
Moore County Sheriff Lane Carter said neither he nor Butler would comment. Jim Morgan, who represented Butler and the sheriff’s office, declined to comment on whether they would appeal the verdict.
Phelps and 1st Lt. Tallas Tomeny had been taking part in Robin Sage, an exercise that trains soldiers for Special Forces. Tomeny was killed, and his estate settled out of court.
During Robin Sage, soldiers simulate infiltration of a foreign nation. Phelps and Charles Leiber, a civilian who was playing the role of an adviser, testified that they thought Butler stopping their vehicle was part of the exercise.
Butler had argued that the men were acting suspiciously in an area that had experienced a lot of burglaries. Butler also said he saw two machine guns and that Tomeny had told Phelps to kill him.
On Tuesday, jurors said they didn’t believe Butler’s claims about the guns or the order to kill. Greg Harris of Hoke County said he found Phelps and Leiber more believable than Butler.
“Mr. Leiber’s testimony was pretty strong,” he said. “And Phelps — (the lawyers) couldn’t get him crossed up. His story stayed the same throughout his testimony.”
Harris said Butler’s story changed.
Remington Raidr
11-06-2009, 11:04
will be on the hook BIG TIME when, not if, Deputy Fife steps on his crank AGAIN. His current agency should get their collective heads out of their asses and get rid of this ticking litigation bomb.:munchin
PedOncoDoc
11-06-2009, 11:08
will be on the hook BIG TIME when, not if, Deputy Fife steps on his crank AGAIN. His current agency should get their collective heads out of their asses and get rid of this ticking litigation bomb.:munchin
I could care less about the lawsuits. What I'm worried about is the safety of the people in his community. It sounds like this guy has no business being in LE.