Lima SWAT killed a young woman and injured her child during a raid at a house Friday night. A man at the residence was being investigated for crack cocaine distribution and was the reason for the raid.
I don't know the circumstances of the shooting, but there have been enough innocent people killed all over the country during these break-down-the-door-and-go-in-shooting raids that you would think the police would use these paramilitary-style assaults with extreme caution, especially where families and children are involved. Whatever the events, nothing justifies injuring a young child in order to grab a guy at home for selling cocaine. Why don't they get him on the street or somewhere else? This cowboy mentality has got to stop.
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/NEWS03/112985...
They probably caught a few stray rounds from an MP5.
The no-knock warrants shouldn't have been allowed in the first place. These people aren't the first to be accidentally injured and won't be the last. Notice how the media plays this one down with a lack of coverage.
This IS about black and white. If the shooting had been me (a white female) shot and killed not a thing would have been said. There would have been no march. But because this was a white officer who shot a black female it's a race thing. I'm sorry but it's wrong. To accuse this Officer of manslaughter is going to cause a lot of people to get angry. Me being one of them.
Just like Rev. Horton said. " When that baby was killed on Eureka Street, no one marched. When Leland Avenue happened, no one marched. When there is a black on black crime, is anyone marching?"
No Rev.Horton nobody is marching.
I am embarrassed by this city. She had kids in that house with a drug dealer. That was her fault. I have children myself. I have a 4 year old and a 2 year old. I am telling you now I would in no way shape or form endanger my children by putting them into a house like that. I believe that in order to stop the drug problem in Lima we should do more raids exactly like that. So that my children will have a future. We need to get ALL the drug dealers out of Lima. I think the police in Lima are doing a great job. I just wish that this wouldn't have ruined a Lima officers life over a mistake. It may have been her life but if her bf would have turned himself in or would have had nothing to do with drugs would it have happened????
nope.
Well said.
No Drugs, No Violent Histroy, No Pitballs, No Crack House, No SWAT team, No Accidental Death, No Marches.
I wonder if the mom was on crack at the time?
We'll find out when the report is issued. In the same vein as your rhetorical question, I'll ask whether the cop was on steroids at the time... 'RoidRage, ya know? Probably never find that one out.
thats ridiculous. it was a accident. i didn't know cops couldn't have accidents. apparently they have to be god and not make them.
SWAT has been used more and more over time for this kind of bullshit. The more they use SWAT (Toledo version: "Directed Patrol" or DP) for routine seizures, the more the public gets used to Gestapo tactics out of the police. This is all preparation for the summary dismissal of Posse Comitatus, and then the military will join in on the fracas. The TV will be 24/7 behind all that, of course. Gotta get your propaganda in line when you're killing off citizens in the new police state.
You guys are right. This is just one indication of the increased militarization of our civil society. Wanna bet that the investigating committee whitewashes the whole incident and finds it all perfectly justified? Nobody is to blame! What BS!
Perhaps citizens take more personal responisibility in their lives. Kids raised in crack houses is that what you are defending?
Don't be stupid. I am not defending any adult in a crackhouse. But a kid is in no way responsible for what his parent is doing. The cops knew there was a family and a kid there, but they busted in anyway with all their automatic weapons drawn and at the ready. Why not get their target on the street? Why not arrest him out of the house? This business of endangering children shows disregard for their lives. The kid and the mother are just "collateral damage" and the cops just shrug their shoulders and walk away. There's too much force and not enough thinking in how we do things.
Mother is part of the problem. I think she knows full well of risks living and raising a family in a crack house. With that many kids, I guessing there will always be a kid in that house. Doesn't matter if someone is freebasing, fighting, passed out, or police raid. Kids have probably seen it all. I'm glad collateral damage was not out in public - James Kirk could have been shot by accident.
I didn't know you were pro-choice...
Playing Devil's Advocate here...
If the 26 year old woman hadn't had her 6 kids (ages 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8) in a house with crack cocaine, then the raid wouldn't have been any threat to them.
Sure, the police should have used more caution when executing the warrant. But don't you think the mom should have been taking a little better care of her kids? Drug dealers and addicts don't need warrants, and they carry guns too.
She had to know what was going on in that house.
Don't get me wrong, it is terrible that a child got hurt but I blame the parents for having the kids in an unsafe environment.
I feel bad for the cop - he has to live with this for the rest of his life.
I pray the the kids are moved to a safer home and that the injured child heals quickly.
Makes me wonder if maybe one of those upstanding crackheads in the house tried to use the child as a shield or something, because you'd think with their training (wouldn't SWAT do that thing where the targets pop out at you and you have to shoot the right ones?)they wouldn't just shoot a kid.
Its terrible this happened but Its on that poor childs mother.
Are you two guys nuts? The mother didn't shoot her daughter, the SWAT team did. If their brains were as big as their guns, this shit wouldn't happen.
Those children had no business being in a home where drugs were being used or delt or made, what ever activity was going on.
The person responsible for them being there was the obviously idiotic and probably drug addicted mother. She might as well have put the gun to the girls head having them in that environment.
OhioKat, can you give me the citation to the law that basically says you no longer have civil rights when somebody in your home is getting involved in drugs? Specifically, I'm looking for the law that cancels your right to life.
Take your time. I'll be checking back every so often for your citation.
No where in my posts did I mention anyone not having a right to life.
I did not even suggest it, so stop trying to put words or thoughts into my mouth.
What I DID say was the following:
I questioned the training methods of the police and I do think they had to have been going into that situation much to fast if they didn't see the child.
I said the mother was an idiot.
I didn't say she deserved to die.
I said there was much blame to be put upon the mother for having the child in that situation.
I did not say she deserved to die for it.
I'm tired of people being idiots and getting themselves killed and their children injured and everyone wanting to make them blameless.
It is my opinion that the mother carrys some of the blame for the injuries to her child for having that child in the situation.
If you are of the mind that its a good, proper and healthy environment to raise a child in a drug house then God help any children you may have.
... so I'll be more specific:
How can we blame anyone for being in an American home by default? Kicking the door down and subjecting inhabitants to gunfire is SOOOOOOOOO 1930s Germany.
I don't blame the mother for specifically having a domicile, regardless of the uses to which that domicile was put. She should NEVER expect a fusillade of bullets to alter her living quarters. She should NEVER expect to be shot down like a dog just because some twit in the household is doing drugs.
The CHOICE of turning a home into a shooting range is ALWAYS made on the part of the shooter. In this case, it's SWAT. And as we've patiently tried to point out to you, SWAT is being used beyond its design. SWAT in America is being used to serve warrants with a huge display of force. That force is (irony!) unwarranted.
It's a slap in the face of SWAT team members to use their expertise in order to serve such stupid warrants. Such trained men and women should be used for truly DANGEROUS targets, not drug suspects.
Since ANY of us in the ghettos may be subject to SWAT raids for all this drug stupidity, you could very well say that from your own logic that having any children at all in the ghetto only puts the blame for "bad raids" upon parents. Seeing that, you should then see how I think your logic in this matter falls apart.
I guess I just do not believe that a crack/drug house has any right to "be" no matter where its located. I think that the police, with the proper warrents have every right to raid said drug houses, I don't care if its in the ghetto or in the 'burbs.
As an adult if you choose to live in or frequent a drug house then, in my opinion you're just asking for trouble and thats that.
But to bring your children into that, well then you're just a special kind of stupid and I'm not feeling very much sympathy for you at all, its the child I feel for.
I'll try to put this as gently as possible:
"With the child shot and maimed, and the mother dead, your sympathy isn't worth a handful of beans."
You persist in looking at the alleged illegal activity, which only leads you down the path of condoning the use of excessive force.
SWAT is a baseball bat, not a scalpel. It has a well-defined purpose: To seize or take down some very bad people. It only stands to reason that you should NOT use this sort of tool to serve a drug warrant upon a home where innocents are residing.
Good. Day.
about that. Legitimate SWAT raids only happen once a year or so, even in a city like Toledo. The rest of the time criminals can be picked up on the street very easily. Of course, you don't get the drama that way.
Some years ago a friend of mine joined the Ohio Highway Patrol. He was issued a service pistol, then told "You'll take an ass whippin' before you pull that pistol. You unnerstan'?"
I wonder what the standing orders for TPD and Lima are.
yet another example of mom of the year....
exactly. let's march for her for having 5 kids in that house. thats wonderful. while a courageous officer has his life ruined over a mistake in protecting Lima from DRUGS!
exactly. let's march for her for having 5 kids in that house. thats wonderful. while a courageous officer has his life ruined over a mistake in protecting Lima from DRUGS!
for the police to shoot a one year old! Period.
I'm not saying that there is but I do truely feel that the ultimate blame for the childs injuries is on the parent who had the child in that environment.
Undeclare "The War On Drugs" and this crap wouldn't happen.
Countless tales like this have resulted from this war on drugs, our longest running war. How many billions squandered? Taxation, regulation, coupled with reasonable public health measures would be a much more logical approach.
What is actually known? Police executed a search warrant, woman was killed, baby was injured, 2 pit bulls shot and one died. Police officer is on administrative leave and the BCI&I has been called in to do the investigation. Police acknowledge they knew kids were present and they set off stun grenades in advance of entering.
Did the woman have a weapon? unknown
Did the woman comply with police commands? unknown
Did the officer shoot indiscriminately? unknown
Was there a reason this type of raid was conducted? unknown
Was there a better way/time to execute the search warrant? unknown
Even Pete said in his original post, "I don't know the circumstances of the shooting..."
The impact of this incident will have a lasting effect on everyone involved - and it isn't good.
One woman was shot dead holding her 1-year old in her arms;
the one-year old was shot and wounded;
All were shot by SWAT.
*Did the woman have a weapon? No, she was holding her baby.
*Did the woman comply with police commands? I doubt there was time to comply with anything given that the MO of these SWAT guys is to create as much chaos and confusion as possible when busting into a house. It's pandemonium.
*Did the officer shoot indiscriminately? Undoubtedly, since he didn't discriminate between dogs and people, threats and non-threats.
*Was there a reason this type of raid was conducted? This is SOP for all these drug arrests. Overwhelming force. They don't need another reason.
*Was there a better way/time to execute the search warrant?
What do you think? I would guess arresting him outside the house might have been a thinking-man's method. Unfortunately, SWAT disdains thinking and prefers to use guns.
We need to disband these "special forces" units and ban all automatic weapons from being used by police. The arrest of one drug dealer is not worth killing and shooting these people.
...are your answers facts that are included in news accounts of the incident or your opinions?
If facts, I'd really appreciate the reference/links. Thanks!
1."The Lima police officer involved in a shooting that caused the death of a mother and injured her 1-year-old son has been placed on administrative leave..." http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080106/NEWS17/801060...
CONCLUSION: the cop shot the woman and her son.
2. ( THE BLADE/AMY E. VOIGT )
By IGNAZIO MESSINA and ERICA BLAKE
BLADE STAFF WRITERS
LIMA, Ohio -- Darla Jennings walked through the streets of south Lima last night sobbing as hundreds of people behind her called for justice after the shooting of her daughter, who was killed by police as she held her baby. http://www.drugpolicycentral.com/bot/article/toledoblade6484.htm
CONCLUSION: the woman was holding her child when they were both shot.
3. "Officers used at least one stun grenade to create a loud noise prior to entering the residence, but the charges were detonated outside, the chief said." Forcible entry is a time of maximizing noise and confusion. Breaking down a door, filling the room with threatening and shouting gunmen and the "flash-bang" device, designed to disorient people, and then shooting dogs testify that this must have been a very intimidating and terrifying time. http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080106/NEWS17/801060...
CONCLUSION: compliance with anybody's commands (if they could even be heard or understood at that moment) would have to be irrelevant.
4. Two dogs were shot and two unarmed people were shot.
CONCLUSION: how much more indiscriminate shooting do you need to see? Should the cops have shot everyone there, including each other, to qualify for indiscriminate shooting?
5. As far as a better way to conduct these type of operations, yes, I can think of several. One, don't bust into people's homes with masked gunmen. Two, take the perp on the street or anywhere outside the home to minimize killing innocents. Three, take away automatic weapons from the cops. These are weapons designed to kill large numbers of people at close range during wartime.
As far as those who say that "she chose to associate with that drug dealer", maybe so. But the cops are not judge, jury, and executioner, and certainly the one-year old child was not responsible for this. Face the fact that the trigger-happy cops screwed up and killed an innocent person and wounded a child. Live with that!
You're welcome.
I know, imagine that.
...don't bust into people's homes with masked gunmen. Two, take the perp on the street or anywhere outside the home to minimize killing innocents.
I think taking the guy on the street is a bad idea. I think that there would be more innocent people at risk that way.
I'm betting any adult in that house knew what was going on. That mother put herself and those children in danger by taking up with a drug user/dealer.
Both the mother and the boyfriend had records:
According to the Blade: "...Terry...was convicted in 1994 on drug trafficking and weapons charges"
and from LimaOhio.com: "Lt. Jim Baker briefly spoke during the news conference about the incident with Terry and an officer that took place in the mid-1990s.
“Mr. Terry had a weapon and there was a fight over that weapon and he tried to use that on Sgt. [Ron] Connor,” Baker said.
Baker also said Wilson had spent time in prison on a drug conviction. That conviction was out of Putnam County, according to court records."
As a mother, I can't imagine putting my children at risk.
I feel horrible for that officer; he has to live with the image of that injured child...
MaumeeMom - I have to agree with you on that one.
The guy had convictions in the past for drug trafficking and weapons charges. Including a charge of previously trying to use a weapon on a police officer.
Trying to get the guy out on the street could have put more innocent people in jeopardy...neighbors and bystanders who were not deliberately associating w/Mr. Terry.
Its a shame that there were kids in the house, and perhaps the police should have considered monitoring the home until the kids were gone. (Though how do we know if they didn't attempt to do so? With so many young kids, including those who weren't school aged, perhaps it was extremely rare to have no kids present in the home? We'll have to wait for the full report to come out and see.)
But it all boils down to the fact that if the mom hadn't allowed Mr. Terry into the kids lives, then they wouldn't have been in danger to begin with.
Let me ask you two ladies a question. Was it worth it to kill the young woman and shoot her child in order to arrest the boyfriend? Yes or no. If yes, then congratulations, you agree with the result. If no, then what should have been handled differently? Forget about the mother being the lowest scum on earth. The question is, was the result worth it?
I have a problem with the child being hurt - the children didn't choose to live in that sort of environment and were innocent bystanders.
If the children hadn't been present and the woman had still been caught in the crossfire...I don't know how I'd feel. Certainly I wouldn't say that she deserved to die, but I'd also recognize that you take certain risks when you choose to live a certain lifestyle.
Can't say what I think should have been handled differently without knowing exactly what happened.
"Hama, hama, ummm, errr, ahh, gee, I dunno", sez Sarah. Let's see if MaumeeMom can do any better.
Sorry...I figured jumping to conclusions without having all the facts released yet was your area of expertise, and I didn't want to horn in on your territory.
Touche! Good one, Sarah. Well, we'll see how this unfolds.
Yep. Will be interesting to see how it proceeds.
And I'd anticipate that there will be information available other than just what's released in the "official investigation report." After all, there were plenty of witnesses in the house. With all the attention this story is getting, it will be more difficult for the police to cover anything up. (If they were going to attempt to do so, of course.) People will be watching this. If the police version seriously contradicts the forensic evidence and the eyewitness accounts (even though most of the witnesses were kids, they know what they saw...poor things), then Lima PD is going to have a lot of explaining to do.
(I guess that's the one "good" thing...though I hate to use the word "good," because nothing about this situation is "good" for anyone. The real truth will be more likely to come out because of the attention being focused on what happened.)
...but it appears you are back to your original "I don't know the circumstances." And that's okay...
1) officers are often put on administrative leave following a shooting and a review. No one said the woman wasn't shot. But, you, I and everyone has no idea what transpired between these two individuals.
2) holding a child does not explain any of the other circumstances surrounding the incident. I don't believe I questioned whether or not she was holding a child at the time.
3) you may have a point about the ability to comply with instructions due to the stun grenade. But neither of us know the impact setting it off outside had on ther woman. We don't KNOW the circumstances or the events that resulted in this particular officer shooting this particular occupant.
4) Pit bulls - and most dogs I assume - would act defensively toward strangers in a home especially in these circumstances. Shooting the dogs, especially considering the history of drug dealers and pitt bulls, may have been a very calculated decision to protect the officers conducting the raid. Again, I'm speculating, but it is within the realm of possibility and does not necessarily indicate indiscriminate shooting.
As for the other two unarmed people you say were shot - I presume you're referring to the mother and child?
In looking over the reports, I didn't see any official comments about individuals with or without weapons. I'm sure that will come out in the report the BCI&I is doing.
5) As for the other ways of doing this - not knowing the circumstances or details of their investigation and all other factors that went into the decision to conduct this type of raid, it is still speculation that something else would have been a better option.
So the point is that none of us know the details - and it is a tragedy for ALL involved.
I'll agree with your statement that "none of us know the details", Maggie. My original point was that these paramilitary raids should be severely restricted. They are used too often to the point where they have become routine. Also, using fully-automatic weapons is extremely dangerous because they are designed to spray an area with gunfire and they lack any kind of precision. It now seems to be the case that this guy isn't a drug dealer at all, judging from reports of the amount of dope they found. Sounds like it was a minimal amount. If they start breaking down doors to every home where there's a little weed inside, half the students at UT are going to the slammer. The cops should not be using these tactics except in the most extreme circumstances and they most certainly should not be carrying automatic weapons. The cops need to start using their big head to think with.
Disband these "special forces" and Ban automatic weapons? haha that's a riot.
These are the things keeping every idiot in line.
If it were up to me I'd say hire every sniper and shoot them one by one. Or do what they did and have raids like that. Seriously maybe people will think about putting their children in danger the next time.
The Blade article today says that people in the community were hanging banners on the house that had racial slurs against white police officers. Where's the outrage over this? If I were to go hang a banner somewhere with racial slurs against a black police officer, I'd be all over the news! National news even!
The article also states that the woman was a "stay-at-home mom." Is that what we're calling welfare hacks that pop out a kid a year now?
You don't know if they were on welfare or not. Here's another slur for you, redneck.
I suppose its the PC way of putting it. lol
It was sickening the way the article in the paper today tried to make her sound like some sort of innocent bystander. Come on - she kept her kids in a home with a known drug dealer. (This man had actually been convicted in the past of drug and weapons charges - you don't think there were guns in the home those children were living in? You don't think those kids had ever been exposed to drugs and weapons before? Come on.)
"Today it was someone else's child, tomorrow it could be yours." (quote from the article) Uh...don't know about the rest of you, but there is no way I'd ever have my kids in a home with a convicted drug dealer.
The kids were innocent bystanders, no question about it. And its awful that one of them was injured. But let's not make the mom who was responsible for them being in that situation to begin with sound like some sort of great mom...the simple fact that she'd have her kids in a situation with drugs and guns *completely* rules out the possibility that she was a good parent. (Boyfriend was a dealer previously convicted of a weapons charge - you know damn well those kids had been around guns before.) Its not like she was a neighbor hit by a stray bullet...she chose to associate with that drug dealer, and unfortunately there are risks that come with that.
(Don't mean to sound so harsh about her, but it burns me to no end when people put their kids in dangerous situations. There have been so many stories in the news recently where kids have been injured/killed because their mothers chose to associate with bad men...Baby Grace/Riley Sawyers being beaten do death by her stepfather, little Tayvon being tourtured and beaten by his mom's boyfriend, the poor children in this case being put in danger b/c the mom chose to be in a relationship with a drug dealer. It just angers me to no end. Sure, nothing we can do will keep our kids 100% safe, but we can still certainly take some precautions to help as much as possible.)
It's probably not a big stretch to assume this mom was on welfare. PC or not - come on. Six kids (one a year) by age 26? My guess is that if she wasn't on welfare, drug money is what supported them. Most likely she was on welfare (more money each month per kid, isnt that how it works?. She either is lazy about birth control, or played the welfare game I've seen many women play - the more kids ya got, the bigger your welfare check is each month, more food stamps. (And I know of some women who are career welfare moms on purpose - & they come from a long line of similar thinking moms, grandmothers, etc.).
Yes, it's horrible she was killled, and her one year old was injured. But the brunt of the blame lies on the mother - pc or not. This was clearly a serious drug house, pit bulls included. I wouldn't let my kids live in a house like that, or with pit bulls that most likely were protection dogs (read between the lines). Yes, this bust went down badly - but I'd hate to see the swat team shelved. This maybe was about getting one drug dealer - maybe not, maybe more. If I had to wager a guess, I'd bet it was a serious drug dealing house - and somebody's kids were getting ahold of the drugs on the street, or they were providing to addicts & abusers - it's how they make the money. IF somebody's 15 yr old kid died of a drug overdose from drugs that came from this house/dealer - all hell would be breaking out over why the cops didn't bust this known drug dealer. I can't fault how this bust was planned - yes, it ended badly - but the key element for successful busts, is surprise. A polite knock on the door allows the dealers to flush drugs, grab weapons, flee. The whole point of the surprise bust element is to find them in the act, with the drugs, on the scene.
100% agree! Pit bulls, Kids, and a Crack House. How many daddys?
Again, I hold the mother responsible for bringing in a known and current drug dealer into her home with a record.
Can't believe how many people on this post defend her actions and the dangerous environment she placed her kids the last 2 years.
I don't see anyone defending her actions. What I see are people upset about the results of SWAT tactics/use.
Having said that (my last post) - I have to wonder why the police would not have known if there were kids in the house. That should have been known - and no swat team should ever barge into a house that way when kids are there - just my two cents, not having much knowledge of how swat teams & drug busts work. Of course, this also may have been a case of kids in the house, always - no idea how to bust them if that was true. (If it were a law to not allow swat drug busts when kids are on the premises, then I can see drug dealers using that to their advantage.). But to simply charge in with guns when kids are there....I don't know what to make of it. Maybe the cops didn't know kids were there - but that doesn't seem likely because I'm sure they'd had that house under watch a while.
Also - even if their mother was on welfare & every kid had a different daddy - there's still no way I can wrap my head around the idea of cops busting in, firing weapons when kids are there. Even if the mom was a crackhead prostitute (not saying she was, this is just an example of an extreme) - she did not deserve to die. As for the shooting of the dogs - it depends I guess, they were pit bulls, and probably were trained to attack. I imagine if a pit bull attacked me & I had a gun handy, I'd shoot it.
jhostetler hit the nail on the head in his post. Nobody is defending the mother's actions, but they are upset about police tactics.
Starling, the cops DID know that there were kids in the house. "[Chief Garlock] said officers were aware that children were inside the home because there were toys in the yard outside and on the front porch." (Today's Blade).
What gets me is that some want to shift blame from the perpetrators of the shooting to the victims of the shooting. That's like saying the girl wanted to be raped because her dress was too short and she wore makeup. Also, notice how the cops are not releasing ANY information about the details of the shooting. Usually, they spill everything right away. This doesn't look good for the Lima cops and I smell a possible coverup in the making.
Cops also knew that the guy they were sent to arrest has priors, deals with crack, history of attempting to use deadly force, and two pit bulls on site. Hence, they sent in the SWAT team. It was a good call. It was good tactics.
Again, the mom placed her self in danger the moment she agreed to turn her house into a crack house, complete with pitbulls, and a boyfriend who tried to kill a cop during his previous arrest.
No way was this going to happen out in the public. This probably rates near the top for SWAT team difficult situations in cramp quarters.
Wrong call, wrong tactics. Two dead because of cops uber-armed and full of testosterone, looking for something to shoot at. There are a million places to arrest people. In a house full of kids? You've got to be kidding. You've been watching too much Military Channel, Brassmonkey!
Wow.
The fact that they went into this family's home shooting, and shot a woman as she held her baby is unjustifiable.
The issue about not wanting to make the arrest in public for safety reasons is nonsense, as there seemed to be no concern at all for going into a home filled with young children while firing assault weapons.
Oh well, they got their drug possession arrest. Besides, murdering some black woman in front of her black children is no big deal, it's not like they're human beings.
Why on earth are you playing the race card?
I haven't seen one post on here saying anything about anyones color until this.
Doesn't matter if she was black, white, brown or green she was an idiot for bringing her child up in a drug house.
Actually, OhioKat, there IS a race factor here. And it's everywhere on this page. Just look for the words, welfare, popping them out every year, unemployed, and all the other code words we use to indicate the scum of the earth. Just look back over these comments. It's all in code. But even "scum" do not deserve to be summarily executed.
I guess I just don't jump to the color black (or any other for that matter) when I read the word welfare, or unemployed or the line "popping them out every year".
In posting on this topic I hadn't even considered a color at all.
Pete... you said:
"Just look for the words, welfare, popping them out every year, unemployed, and all the other code words we use to indicate the scum of the earth. Just look back over these comments. It's all in code".
If those are code words to indicate a woman is black, what are the code words used for a white woman who is on welfare... who pops out a kid every year... and is unemployed? Is there also a separate set of code words for an Hispanic woman who is on welfare... who pops out a kid every year... and is unemployed?
Hey, Braincramp, I am a white male who grew up in this society and I know the code words when I see or hear it.
The following is what I have culled from only 2/3 of this page. You don't have to get too far before you start forming an impression of her race. Let's not kid ourselves.
*Kids raised in crack houses
*raising a family in a crack house
*freebasing, fighting, passed out, or police raid
*Drug dealers and addicts don't need warrants
*crackheads in the house
*use the child as a shield
*drug addicted mother
*raise a child in a drug house
*I don't care if its in the ghetto or in the 'burbs.
*woman was a "stay-at-home mom
*we're calling welfare hacks that pop out a kid a year
*kids in a home with a convicted drug dealer
*have her kids in a situation with drugs and guns
*those kids had been around guns before
*mothers chose to associate with bad men
*assume this mom was on welfare
*Six kids (one a year) by age 26?
*if she wasn't on welfare, drug money is what supported them
*welfare (more money each month per kid, isnt that how it works?
*lazy about birth control, or played the welfare game
*the more kids ya got, the bigger your welfare check is each month, more food stamps
*career welfare moms
*a long line of similar thinking moms, grandmothers
*clearly a serious drug house
*I wouldn't let my kids live in a house like that
*pit bulls that most likely were protection dogs (read between the lines)
*I'd bet it was a serious drug dealing house
*they were providing to addicts & abusers
*Pit bulls, Kids, and a Crack House
*How many daddys?
*mother was on welfare & every kid had a different daddy
*mom was a crackhead prostitute (not saying she was
*pit bulls, and probably were trained to attack
*she agreed to turn her house into a crack house, complete with pitbulls
I don't know about you, but unless one is extraordinarily dense he should have had a mental picture of a black woman who is a crackhead and a whore. Don't be naive.
Do you honestly think that all of those can't also be applied to white women?
And since when has being a stay at home mom ment you were on drugs?
I don't think it makes you dense if you look at that list and don't think black woman, I think it makes you an obviously more open minded and less prejudice then others on this forum.
A drug house?
You're aware that there wasn't even sufficient evidence to charge the man with distribution, right? He may have been in possession, though that has yet to be proven.
That aside, people live in a lot of different circumstances for a lot of different reasons, and the fact that she was living in the situation she was at the time does not justify her being murdered in front of her children as she held her infant son.
The police knew that there were young children and bystanders in the house and went in shooting anyway. If it doesn't show malice, it at least shows a serious disregard for human life. It's just hard to imagine that the police would have been so quick to shoot if the people in the house looked more like them. Maybe it wasn't race, maybe they have no regard for any human life.
all of the time. That does not justify babies getting shot by a policeman. And yes all of the code words are being used to depict a black mother, as if white mothers are incapable of making mistakes that sometimes harm their children.
I cited a couple of recent news articles where the mom's choices put her kid in danger...not all of the moms I mentioned were black. Bad parenting comes in all shapes, sizes, and colors. (I'd love to get a crack at Lisa Holland, that despicable excuse for a human being. But I digress...that's not really relevant in this thread, other than her being a sorry excuse for a "mother" who happens to be white.)
Anyhow, I'm not saying by any means that I agree 100% with what the police did. Just that as a mom, it angers me to see people put their kids in unsafe situations. Being in a 2 year relationship with a guy like Mr. Terry is not a "mistake" - it is a conscious lifestyle choice.
Certainly there should be an investigation and a re-evaluation of how a search warrant should be executed when children are suspected to be present. Regardless of the mom's troubles and poor choices, the children are still innocent victims. (Even the children who weren't physically harmed are going to have to deal with the emotional aftermath.)
I think part of the reason I'm so angry about the mom's choices regarding drugs is that just this weekend I read about a young girl named Ebony Dorsey - a beautiful, bright young girl who was raped and murdered by her mom's crack dealer/boyfriend. (I won't go into all the details here, but anyone who wishes to do so can read more here: http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/12349581.html ) So to read about poor Ebony yesterday and then hear this story today where another woman had her kids around a crack dealer boyfriend just made me so angry. :(
But my anger/sadness/frustration with the mom is not intended to imply complete support of the police actions either.
Perhaps there should be a separate topics discussing the frustration w/the police actions vs. frustration with parents who make choices that put their kids in bad situations. Both topics are worthy of discussion, and being frustrated about one doesn't necessarily mean that you condone the other either.
Thank you, Sara, for expressing what I have tried to say. I am going to get out of this thread because so many times people twist words and claim we imply things that we in no way meant. It is very frustrating when people are so set to make everything political or race related when it is not.
This was another tragedy. We seem to have discussed too many of these on this site lately. It is very disheartening.
I did read that story from Philly and it is also horrible.
pete - I also don't think 'black' when I hear the word 'welfare', etc. The welfare addicted families that I've personally seen & known, have been white - not black. I seem to recall reading a few years ago that there are more single white women on welfare than black women - not sure if it's true or not, but it wouldn't surprise me. Popping out lots of kids who all have different daddies is also not a 'black thing'. That said, I don't think race had anything at all to do with any of this, and it gets wearisome when people try to play the race card on everything that happens. (And why wasn't the race card played when the black lawyer who faked her kidnapping & blamed it on 2 white men & a black woman?) The fact that neighbors are hanging banners means nothing as far as what is true in this case or not. It only means they are rallying because the woman who got killed was black. Just another way of playing the race card. (When have you ever seen that happen, in reverse, when a black person kills a white person? Where the neighborhood bans together & hangs banners for unity?)
I've seen a lot of swat drug busts on tv cop shows (actual video cops shows) where they've busted into people's homes that had kids - and personally know a highly experienced cop -, so it's not unusual for them to do so. Like I said before, if there was a law that said cops could not raid a home where children are present, then drug dealers would surely find a way to use that to their advantage. Unless that mother had a weapon (in addition to her child), there was no reason for that cop to have shot at her. I'm guessing that there was a trigger happy cop who maybe freaked out with whatever commotion was going on when they busted into the house, and he just fired. Or, maybe he thought she had a weapon. Either way, there's no excuse I don't think. Even if they found tons of crack in that house, there was no excuse to fire a gun at an unarmed woman with a child. The only reasonable explanation I can think of that would remotely explain the cops actions, is that if the woman & child got caught in crossfire in a volatile, noisy, scary situation that included the perps having weapons, or the dogs attacking on top of it all. None of us has had to be in the situation before. I'm not defending the cop who fired the deadly shot - but honestly, it can be a scary thing to be ordered by your commanding officer to raid a house or arrest somebody (or even a simple traffic stop), and not know if that person is armed & dangerous or just plain crazy. There's no way of knowing how somebody will react if they fear going to jail. There have been cops who've been shot to death for simply pulling a car over for a simple traffic stop - not knowing beforehand that the driver was wanted for something or other. Domestic Violence calls are the most dangerous for cops. It's easy to point fingers & presume to know what went down in that house. For now, I am assuming that 1) PC or not, black or white - she wasn't a good mother because she put her kids in a house like that. A shelter would have been safer for them - even without a drug raid. So the mom carries much of the blame. 2) Regardless of what went down or what went wrong - the cop who fired the shot that killed that woman seems to have been trigger happy, and should be held accountable.
She wasn't a good mother. We are all agreed on that. What do we do to avoid a repeat performance of this mess? 1) Forbid the use of fully-automatic weapons in the police departments. 2) Restrict no-knock and SWAT teams from being used except in very extreme circumstances (like maybe if an asteroid hits the earth). 3) Make a rule that arrests should almost always occur under the most benign of circumstances and never, unless absolutely necessary, if innocent bystanders might be harmed. 4) Demilitarize the police and take away all of their macho equipment like tanks, armored-personnel carriers, attack helicopters (no kidding!) and other junk that just pumps them up.
This kind of crap of killing kids is just going to get worse the way we are going. The "war on terror" and "war on drugs" is starting to hit close to home... maybe yours next.
By the way, here is another story on this that adds a few details: http://www.individual.com/story.php?story=75714834
in the individual.com link provided that this occured...
The last fatal shooting by a Lima police officer was by a member of the SWAT team inside the Lima Rescue Home in downtown Lima on Aug. 23, 2000. Michael Hidebrandt was killed by a SWAT officer after he reportedly was armed with a knife during a six-hour standoff.
There may or not be be details on this that give a more complete picture, but why does a man armed with a knife need to be shot to death? A shot to the leg or shoulder wouldn't be sufficient to disable him? Was he holding the knife at someone's throat?
Obviously the relevency here is prior use of 'possible' excessive force by the Lima SWAT team.
1) Forbid the use of fully-automatic weapons in the police departments.
Uh no.
2) Restrict no-knock and SWAT teams from being used except in very extreme circumstances (like maybe if an asteroid hits the earth).
Again no. Don't be a drug dealer with a warrant and you wont have your door knocked down.
3) Make a rule that arrests should almost always occur under the most benign of circumstances and never, unless absolutely necessary, if innocent bystanders might be harmed.
your kidding right? there's always going to be a innocent bystander. Honestly I don't care. If it keeps my children safe more power to them. don't say it could be my children. That would make me laugh. My children are no where near crack houses.
4) Demilitarize the police and take away all of their macho equipment like tanks, armored-personnel carriers, attack helicopters (no kidding!) and other junk that just pumps them up.
Seriously? And what? Have everyone own a gun to keep themselves safe? haha no thanks. I like the way they do their job and I'd fight tooth and nail to make sure they keep doing it that way.
Read your link. Think the cops did the best they could do in this "high risk situation".
Your link further bolsters my opinion on how dangerous this mother's 2 year conscience decision to put her and her kids in harms way by living with Mr. Terry.
Your link also strengthens my opinion that this SWAT team did things by the book, got upper approval to preceed, and tried to minimize risks as much as possible. It would have been a different story if it were a bunch of local patrolmen drawing a plan together in the dirt with some sticks and rocks.
It's unfortunate the mother died and her 1 year old got shot in the "high risk situation" she ended up creating.
From Maggie Thurber:
Did the woman have a weapon? unknown Immaterial
Did the woman comply with police commands? unknown Immaterial
Did the officer shoot indiscriminately? unknown Immaterial
Was there a reason this type of raid was conducted? unknown Immaterial
Was there a better way/time to execute the search warrant? unknown Immaterial
What I see in many of these posts is an attempt to shift responsibility away from its rightful place, which is resting squarely on the shooter. When I pick up a firearm, I and I alone am responsible for any injury or death caused by that firearm. Not anyone else, not anything else, just me.
This police officer mishandled his firearm, and as a result one woman is dead. Any attempt to trivialize this loss of life (which some of you are doing), results in your own life becoming less valuable. As society becomes used to killing by police, more killings will result.
I read some of these posts here, and the comments amount to "no great loss, she was a welfare mom, and a bad one at that. The kids are probably better off without her." Whose mom do you suppose will be shot next?
my questions were not "immaterial."
If the woman had been brandishing a weapon (unknown), the officer's use of his weapon may have been justified. Additionally, if the woman had a weapon, then it would not necessarily mean that he had 'mishandled his firearm.'
I asked the questions to show that there is a LOT of relevant and very material information WE DO NOT KNOW.
Speculation about the incident should, imho, wait until the details are known.
btw - I've not defended the officer nor the woman but have said this is tragedy for everyone involved.
my questions were not "immaterial."
They are in this case. Your questions tend to detract from the shooter's responsibility, which is the opposite of what should be happening right now.
If the woman had been brandishing a weapon (unknown), the officer's use of his weapon may have been justified. Additionally, if the woman had a weapon, then it would not necessarily mean that he had 'mishandled his firearm.'
A child less than two years old was shot. If that isn't mishandling a weapon, I'd like to know what is.
btw - I've not defended the officer nor the woman but have said this is tragedy for everyone involved.
Sure you have. Your questions and attempts to divert attention from the shooter serve to defend him, and to defend the police department as a whole. Any and all failure to condemn this shooting in the strongest possible terms supports the position of the police department and of the shooter, which is to say that the shooting is completely justifiable.
A good beginning to this 'investigation' would be to relieve all Lima police officers of their firearms until further notice. Issue a shotgun to each squad car, to be carried locked in a gun rack with the ammunition carried separately, locked in the trunk.
Perhaps this is a better idea than to limit the police to one locked-up shotgun with the ammo stored in the trunk...
... just like Sherrif Andy Taylor's deputy, Barney... he was alowed to carry a sidearm, but all he got was one bullet that he had to keep buttoned up in his shirt pocket.
madjack!
I haven't attempted to divert attention anywhere other than to the FACTS and away from SPECULATION. And my questions could not have been intended to defend the police department when one of the questions I asked was if the officer was shooting indiscriminately...
I didn't defend anyone in this only pointed out that we don't know what happened, or what the circumstances are. The police officer could have been trigger-happy and he could have been completely justified. We don't know.
A lack of condemnation against the police officer (absent knowledge of what actually occurred) is NOT a defense of that officer. It's reserving judgment until facts are known. When the results of the investigation are known, we can then condemn or not.
Your emotion seems to have gotten the better of you...do you really think that relieving all Lima police officers of their weapons is a prudent thing to do?
Actually, DISBANDING the Lima SWAT unit would be a prudent thing to do. It's almost six days and not a word has been heard about the incident. I am very suspicious.
was a bad mother? Unless you personally know this mother and know how she interacted with her children, it would be foolhardy to assume that she was a bad mother. A crack house does not have to be a den of inequity that we all see on television. I would not raise children in a home where people are coming and going, much less what a crack house is perceived to be, but who is to say that this is what was taking place.
You all can not say that this was a bad mother because you don't know who she was or what she was about. The fact that she had 6 children does not make her a bad mother, the fact that she lived in an alleged "crack house" does not make her a bad mother. the fact that she had dogs in the house does not make her a bad mother. If she was on welfare that does not make her a bad mother, because she lived with an alleged drug dealer does not make her a bad mother.
As I said before mothers make mistakes all of the time and sometimes it results in the death of the mother and sometimes the child. The mother who was involved in the horrific automobile crash on 1-280 was she a bad mother? Were all of the children in seat belts or child car seats? If they weren't does that make her a bad mother?
Some of you are just too judgmental, especially you mothers. I am sure that you have all made mistakes, poor choices and bad decisions.
I've never claimed to be a perfect mother and you're right, being poor, doesn't make you a bad mothert, having six children doesn't make you a bad mother, having dogs (even put bulls) doesn't make you a bad mother but I'm sorry I don't see how you can raise your children around drugs and still be a good mother.
As for the other poster saying the officer mishandled his weapon. Unless you were there, at this point you don't know that. You don't know what that woman was doing, she could have been acting agressively to the officers, she could have had a weapon.
I wasn't going to say anything more in this thread, because there was nothing else I had left to say until the investigation was complete. But then you go and make a ridiculous comment like this...sigh.
It is absolutely repulsive that you would even dare suggest a comparison between a mom who was a passenger in a car with her children vs. a mother who raises her children around drugs.
And by the way...raising your children in a home where crack is present and keeping company with a convicted drug dealer absolutely does make you a bad mother. Period. End of story.
It doesn't mean that she deserved to die. It doesn't mean that she might not have been a pleasant person to be around. But the fact that you might even insinuate that its okay to have your kids around crack is ludicrous, and its an insult to women everywhere (black, white, or any other race) who fight to keep drugs like crack out of the lives of their children.
(And yes...a person who raises a child in an alcoholic environment would be a bad parent too.)
This woman had to have known the man she lived with had a record of drug deals (or she's stupid or naive, which I doubt). But you're right - until we know the facts, it's guessing. But IF this man was a known drug dealer, then yes, it makes her a bad mother (in my opinion) that she allowed her children to live in an unsafe environment (drugs, guns, pit bulls tend to go together - doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots). An 'alleged' crack house is a house that can be expected to include some danger - a good mother would put her kids safety above any loyalty to her boyfriend.
around alcohol and cigarettes all of the time every day. Does that make them bad mothers? What is the difference between crack and alcohol besides one being legal and one being illegal? They both alter your mind and your behavior. At one time alcohol was illegal. Now you can buy it anywhere, anytime.
Actually I'd say that if you're raising your child in an environment where there is heavy drinking on a daily and continuous basis then you're just as negligent as the mother who raised her child in a drug house. If you've got people going in and out 24/7 flopped around passed out and puking from drinking so much then that is not a healthy place for a child.
I'm shocked that you would think it was.
I'm not talking about the parents who occasionally have a drink around their children either so please don't try to split that hair.
And just to be fair I'd say the same thing if we were discussing a father.
While growing up, if you had to choose between living in a home where alcohol and cigarettes were used vs. a home where crack was used (and strangers coming in at all hours to buy and sell it), in which home would you choose to live?
Wow purnhrt, your ignorance is top notch tonight. People kill each other and do stupid things to obtain crack. The same can't (typically) be said of alcohol.
Given that this guy seems like a small time dealer at best, as evidenced by the lack of any trafficking charges, let's try a different scenario:
A well-to-do white couple are at home in their $400,000 home on the outskirts of town. As the husband prepares to go out on the town with some business associates, his young wife is playing with their beautiful 14 month-old baby, surrounded by their other lovely children. Police, aware that every so often the husband sells some high-quality, powdered cocaine to his friends and coworkers, sneak past the subdivision gates. The happy family are engaged in conversation when they hear a loud explosion near the front door. Before they can even guess what's happening masked SWAT team members kick through the door and fire their automatic weapons. Bullets rip through the baby and into the mother, who collapses into a pool of blood in the clean, spacious living room. The children huddle in terror around their quickly dying mother, as the masked men drag their father away in handcuffs.
This situation would probably be considered a lot less tolerable by most of those defending the police for their actions, though only the most honest among us will admit it.
Do we know that they entered the house and just began fireing or were they confronted by an armed suspect?
That is what makes all the difference in my opinion.
If the cops bust in the door and start shooting blindly then they are wrong.
It doesn't matter if its a house in the hood or the 'burbs.
If they burst in the door and the suspect was armed and used it in a threatening manner then lets be serious, you know it would mean all bets were off. You raise a gun to a cop, especially one in this situation then you're assured shots will be fired.
Do we know what role the woman played? Was she sitting there innocently or did she jump in and attempt to interfere with the officers?
motherhood. All mothers make mistakes, bad choices and bad decisions especially in this society that we live in today.
Terika Wilson, aged 26, according to her sister, was a good mother. Her baby was shot in the shoulder, the arm and a finger was blown off. Do you know how small a one year old is? How is the mother responsible for that?
the police could have waited for the suspect and picked him up outside
this only stirs up animosity in the community
purnhrt - the fault of the mother lies in the fact that she had her children in a house where there were drugs &am