AZ - Jose Guerena Shot 60 Times By SWAT Team

MassMark said:
Bump. Because I will not let this die, because this dead horse has not been beaten...Because Jose and the people that loved him deserve justice. Because the Pima County SWAT team are murderers...




Read more: http://azstarnet.com/article_d3a3dbba-9d18-11e0-8858-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1QCjJRVhy

http://azstarnet.com/article_d3a3dbba-9d18-11e0-8858-001cc4c002e0.html
Click to expand...

I think the investigators who got the warrant and the commanding officers who chose to use SWAT are more guilty than the individual SWAT team members.
Granted the SWAT team did appear to function with grand incompetence, but this could be because an even more incompetent leader assembled a random crew of people from several departments (as some stories claimed), and then deployed them without proper intel and surveillance having been gathered.

I don't have a huge problem with the SWAT team members not being charged. They may have known nothing of the case, they were just told to issue a warrant at a specific time and place and ended up with a gun pointed at them (allegedly). Yeah, I know, the old "just following orders" defense.... But if you are on a SWAT team I think it is reasonable to assume that when you get deployed it is because there may be a significant threat (although that seems to be becoming less and less true....)

However, I do have huge problem with whoever issued and commanded the SWAT raid not being charged. We need to set the precedent somewhere that they can and will be held accountable. Maybe, just maybe, then they will start showing a little responsibility and discretion in their tactics.

But the SWAT team also denied medial attention, so at the very least that is negligent homicide, or whatever failing to call 911 goes for these days.
 
Cardinal Ximinez said:
Interesting:



Good thing they were LEOs. A private citizen making a similar "mistake" would already be in jail by now.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is how we all know they're lying thru their teeth. Any one of us would be in jail since the day this happened if we made a "mistake" like that. And either you don't have a properly trained SWAT team that doesn't spend nearly enough time shooting (not knowing the difference between being shot at or shot next to) OR you gunned down a guy on purpose and are making up whatever lie you think a stupid media will run with.

Either way you should all lose your jobs along with your superiors and go to jail. And quite frankly I'm honestly not sure which of the two scenarios scares me more.
 
calsdad said:
Which is why I said that people need to get it embedded deep into their conciousness that they need to defend themselves - and it should not matter who is coming thru the door, a criminal or some sort of "legal" agency.

YOU ARE GOING TO DIE ANYWAY. Whether you did something wrong - or not. In fact you are probably LESS likely to die if the people coming thru the door are what are traditionally thought of as "criminals" - because once the shooting starts they will more than likely scatter.

My question is this: If I am innocent, and armed men are coming thru my front door armed to the teeth and trigger happy - why should I be the only one that dies? Especially given the widely understood reality that most of these "raids" are done over drugs - something that society has massive differences on about whether or not they should be legal or not. And also given the massive level of screw ups during these raids.
Click to expand...

I agree you will die regardless of who comes through your door. Nor do I disagree that I would rather take some of my murder's with me then just die.
Here's the pisser, Lets say Jose did shoot whomever is about to try and kill him? Then the story we all just read would not have come across nation wide as a former marine being shot by the police without having fired a shot proving the officers lied. It would have been police returning fire and defending themselves.

How often do we read that, Police returning fire/defending themselves? And how often is it someone just taking their murders with them? Not actually Police officers defending themselves.

Of course if Jose had shot and wounded the SWAT team THEN medical response would have been significantly faster and he might have lived.
 
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson

The right to bear arms is the only thing that stands between you, a private citizen, and a tyrannical government, but apparently it also gives them enough reason to kill you without a trial. The Patriot Act violates the Fourth Amendment, which says the government cannot conduct a search without obtaining a warrant and showing probable cause to believe that the person has committed or will commit a crime. It also fails to provide notice - even after the fact - to persons whose privacy has been compromised. Notice is also a key element of due process, which is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. The officers broke the rules of engagement and fired upon a residence of innocents. They are lucky they didn't hit the wife and kid too. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Shoot first ask questions later, and cover up as much as you can. Thanks to the Patriot Act they do not need to justify the search, legal or illegal. As far as they are concerned, they got their guy, end of story. No justice, of course.
 
goofycj7 said:
I agree you will die regardless of who comes through your door. Nor do I disagree that I would rather take some of my murder's with me then just die.
Here's the pisser, Lets say Jose did shoot whomever is about to try and kill him? Then the story we all just read would not have come across nation wide as a former marine being shot by the police without having fired a shot proving the officers lied. It would have been police returning fire and defending themselves.

How often do we read that, Police returning fire/defending themselves? And how often is it someone just taking their murders with them? Not actually Police officers defending themselves.

Of course if Jose had shot and wounded the SWAT team THEN medical response would have been significantly faster and he might have lived.
Click to expand...

Sad but true, RIP Marine!
 
goofycj7 said:
I agree you will die regardless of who comes through your door. Nor do I disagree that I would rather take some of my murder's with me then just die.
Here's the pisser, Lets say Jose did shoot whomever is about to try and kill him? Then the story we all just read would not have come across nation wide as a former marine being shot by the police without having fired a shot proving the officers lied. It would have been police returning fire and defending themselves.

How often do we read that, Police returning fire/defending themselves? And how often is it someone just taking their murders with them? Not actually Police officers defending themselves.

Of course if Jose had shot and wounded the SWAT team THEN medical response would have been significantly faster and he might have lived.
Click to expand...

Excellent points! It makes you wonder just how many of the incidents we hear about in the media are twisted in this manner to look like the police had to return fire in self-defense, so now the "perp" is dead? It is true that our perception of events can be swayed very easily in that manner, since once we hear that someone was shooting at the police when he was killed, we are conditioned to automatically assume he was the bad guy.[rolleyes] In the case of Jose, he became headline news as something of a martyr, only because he never returned fire.
 
Any apologists want to explain why this guy was killed? Everything so far can be summarized by:

  1. Police use incredibly flimsy evidence to get a rubber-stamping judge to issue a ridiculously broad search warrant.
  2. SWAT serves the warrant by invading the man's home, recklessly and unnecessarily, and knowing innocent people and children are present.
  3. The man has the audacity to arm himself against what easily could have been a home invasion by police impersonators, yet does not fire a shot.
  4. SWAT unloads on the guy, hitting him, his house, neighboring houses, and nothing at all.
  5. SWAT decides to let him bleed out rather than allow medical care.
  6. The police and their masters investigate themselves and shockingly find no fault on their end.

What crime did he commit before they invaded his house?
 
economist said:
Any apologists want to explain why this guy was killed? Everything so far can be summarized by:

  1. Police use incredibly flimsy evidence to get a rubber-stamping judge to issue a ridiculously broad search warrant.
  2. SWAT serves the warrant by invading the man's home, recklessly and unnecessarily, and knowing innocent people and children are present.
  3. The man has the audacity to arm himself against what easily could have been a home invasion by police impersonators, yet does not fire a shot.
  4. SWAT unloads on the guy, hitting him, his house, neighboring houses, and nothing at all.
  5. SWAT decides to let him bleed out rather than allow medical care.
  6. The police and their masters investigate themselves and shockingly find no fault on their end.

What crime did he commit before they invaded his house?
Click to expand...

+ everything I could come up with to + it with.
 
economist said:
Any apologists want to explain why this guy was killed? Everything so far can be summarized by:

  1. Police use incredibly flimsy evidence to get a rubber-stamping judge to issue a ridiculously broad search warrant.
  2. SWAT serves the warrant by invading the man's home, recklessly and unnecessarily, and knowing innocent people and children are present.
  3. The man has the audacity to arm himself against what easily could have been a home invasion by police impersonators, yet does not fire a shot.
  4. SWAT unloads on the guy, hitting him, his house, neighboring houses, and nothing at all.
  5. SWAT decides to let him bleed out rather than allow medical care.
  6. The police and their masters investigate themselves and shockingly find no fault on their end.

What crime did he commit before they invaded his house?
Click to expand...
Still waiting.
 
Police procedure is severely lacking when non-uniformed cops and citizens are being slaughtered by swat teams and poorly trained officers. When are we finally going to fix this? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in a botched SWAT raid before we fix the problem? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?
 
joeendris said:
Kind of like this homeowner who validly was defending him home...hey, this was in Phoenix too! Imagine that! [hmmm]
Click to expand...


Wow, just amazing. And nothing happens. Is there any follow up to this? Should create another thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
joeendris said:
Kind of like this homeowner who validly was defending him home...hey, this was in Phoenix too! Imagine that! [hmmm]
Click to expand...

That's what can happen when you call for help. I've said it before: never, ever call for government help unless you have absolutely no other options. Even then, make damn sure everything is buttoned down before you call. Like a lot of people, this guy made the mistake of expecting government to help him. That got him shot six times by the police.
 
This latest report of a shooting in Phoenix (the capital of a Free State ?) underscores the volatility of a lethal force encounter.

One thing that trainer Mas Ayoob, as well as others keep stating is that when you are involved in a shooting or in a situation where you are using a firearm while waiting for the police to arrive, is to give a description of yourself to the 911 operator. This is not the first time a good guy got shot like this.

Now you might say, well his wife told the officers that her husband was the one with the gun. Unfortunately, this now turns into a "he says, she says". If Mr.Arambula had given a description of himself, then there would have been documented proof on tape that the police should have known who the good guy was. This would have bolstered his case.

This is yet another example of the real ordeal of a lethal force incident becoming such after the initial threat has been neutralized (either by control or actual employment of a firearm).

If the allegation by Mr. Arambula's attorney is correct that there is more information on the tape which shows a police procedural error, then clearly it would appear that Mr. Arambula will prevail in civil court or reach an out of court settlement.

At the crux of the issue is the conduct of the responding officers of the Phoenix, PD and how they reacted. If the allegations are correct, then they committed egregioius behavior, but behavior that is seemingly becoming more typical as the "them versus us" paramilitary mindset continues to permeate police culture.

If you are one of the "good guys or gals" you really have to look at the whole dynamic of the employment of lethal force because you will literally fight like you train, and if your training stops after you present your firearm whether to deter and subdue or to neutralize, then your training is incomplete. You have to have the requisite skill sets to deal with the aftermath. If this means reviewing and practicing, then by all means do so, and get some formal training and read. One of the things you have to ensure is that the police have an accurate description of you In the heat of battle when the adrenaline is flowing, it is so important to remember the basics and that is one of the basics which is why you have to train, train and train and review all of the time and keep a "combat mindset". There are many good books and trainers out there. Always be prepared for the worst case scenario.

There are those who accuse us in the Northeast of being overly cautious and that police misconduct with regard to dealing with a lawfully armed citizen would "never happen in their city or county or state"....well this happened in Phoenix. 'nuff said.

Remember the police are not your friends and there is absolutely no guarantee that they will respond in a professional manner. When you are in a jam and have subdued/neutralized the bad guy, you have to realize that the police coming to the rescue may not necessarily be your saviors, and that you might be mistaken for a bad guy or simply shot...just because.

This is not an apology for the police or their actions. I sincerely hope that Mr. Arambula gets a nice fat settlement from the City of Phoenix. Justice will never be served with regard to the officer who fired the shots which is an is and not a should.

Wake up Mr. and Mrs. America because soon it will be Mr. and Mrs. Amerika if people don't start reacting.
 
Last edited:
joeendris said:
Kind of like this homeowner who validly was defending him home...hey, this was in Phoenix too! Imagine that! [hmmm]
Click to expand...


That's one of the worst things I've had the misfortune of listening to. That poor guy. You think you're doing the right thing, defending your family, next thing you know you're dead. He would have been better off just shooting the intruder then calling the cops. It's clear that a lot of good people who buy guns for home defense don't want to kill someone, even when they pose a threat. I pray to God that I and everyone else here are never put in a situation where we would have to make that decision.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

North Andover SWAT Standoff - Tango Down
Replies
0
Views
269
VTski4x4
VTski4x4
Robotic police dog shot multiple times, credited with avoiding potential bloodshed
Replies
19
Views
463
millbilly
millbilly
Man with hostages at Florida bank shot, killed by SWAT sniper
Replies
16
Views
629
Asaltweapon
Asaltweapon
SWAT team responding to Arkansas shopping mall, police ask public to avoid the area: Officials called it “an incident that is active"
Replies
5
Views
231
TJ4
T
VIDEO: All-Female SWAT Team Fails Basic Obstacle Course
Replies
26
Views
892
LakeTrout
L
Back
Top Bottom