Permit suspended in Ragsdale case

[taz-2005]

I guess that is what the COP would do to us "regular people"

http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060722/NEWS/607220459/1116

Permit suspended in Ragsdale case

Shooting of officer investigated

By Kevin Keenan TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF


It was in the best interest of everybody.

Chief Richard L. Handfield,
MILLBURY POLICE DEPARTMENT

SHREWSBURY— The Millbury Police Department has suspended the firearms license of local auto dealer Mark P. Ragsdale while police investigate his shooting of a Shrewsbury police officer at his home last week, police said.

The shooting occurred at 2:30 a.m. July 14 in Mr. Ragsdale’s home, 17A Farmington Drive. When Officers Stephen Rice and Ryan Chartrand went there to investigate a burglar alarm that had gone off, Mr. Ragsdale shot Officer Rice in the abdomen.

Officer Rice, a one-year member of the force who was seriously injured in the shooting, was released yesterday from UMass Memorial Medical Center — University Campus in Worcester and paid a brief visit to the Shrewsbury Police Department, Police Chief A. Wayne Sampson said.


“It was very gratifying for all the department employees to see him out and walking,” Chief Sampson said. “He said ‘hi’ to everyone, and said he feels great to be out in the fresh air and sun.”

Mr. Ragsdale’s Class A license to carry firearms was suspended Monday, according to Millbury Police Chief Richard L. Handfield. The license permits a gun owner to carry a concealed, high-capacity handgun. Chief Handfield said he spoke to Chief Sampson and decided to suspend Mr. Ragsdale’s license indefinitely while police investigate.

“It was in the best interest of everybody,” Chief Handfield said.

Mr. Ragsdale is a former Millbury resident. He was issued a firearms license by Millbury police at least three years ago, according to police. Firearms licenses are issued and administered by the cities and towns of holders until the licenses expire.

Mr. Ragsdale filed a change of address form with Millbury, and the address of his license was properly changed, Chief Handfield said. Millbury still retains authority over his license, however, until its expiration date. Massachusetts gun owners need to renew their licenses every six years; the law was recently changed from four years.

As a current Shrewsbury resident, Mr. Ragsdale will have to apply for a license renewal with the Shrewsbury Police Department, Chief Handfield said. Mr. Ragsdale can appeal the license suspension to Millbury police, but has not yet done so, Chief Handfield said. Mr. Ragsdale and his wife bought their Shrewsbury home in December 2002, according to records at the Worcester Registry of Deeds.

Mr. Ragsdale has not been charged in the shooting. Shrewsbury police are investigating with an assist from the state police detectives assigned to Worcester District Attorney John J. Conte’s office.

“We’re continuing to investigate wherever the evidence takes us,” Chief Sampson said. “At this point, we are taking a very cautious and methodical approach. It will probably be several weeks before we make any conclusions.”

Firearms licenses are issued by local police departments, though the local departments submit applications to the state Criminal History Systems Board for review.

The two officers were let into Mr. Ragsdale’s home July 14 by a neighbor after they searched outside the residence. The neighbor, who had a key and was on the alarm company’s list of people to notify regarding the residence, told police Mr. Ragsdale was on vacation and that the home should be empty, according to police.

Police were unaware, however, that Mr. Ragsdale had reportedly come home and set off the alarm. The officers, who were in full uniform and arrived in a marked cruiser, noticed a dim light on the second floor and saw a shadowy figure, according to police. They entered the home to search the interior and Officer Rice was shot by Mr. Ragsdale, who was alone in the home, as he reached the second floor. Chief Sampson said Mr. Ragsdale’s wife and children were on vacation at the time.

The officers did not announce who they were and that they were entering the home. Such an announcement could be useful in certain circumstances, but could also give away an officer’s tactical advantage, depending on the situation, Chief Sampson said.

Mr. Ragsdale, president and chief executive officer of the Ragsdale Motor Group network of auto dealerships in Shrewsbury and Spencer, was licensed to carry the Smith & Wesson semiautomatic handgun. Mr. Ragsdale did not return a message left with an employee of his business.

Chief Sampson said Officer Rice is expected to recover from his injury but will be out of work for an unknown amount of time.

 

[Martlet]

What a tragedy. That article puts me more on Ragsdale's side, though.

Dark house. Silent entry. No identification.

 

[FPrice]

What little we know about the case so far tends to put me (very) cautiously on the home-owners side also.

However, when you go away and let people know you will be away, you should let people know when you are back. Park your car out front, call the neighbor, call the alarm company.

 

[taz-2005]

I still can't get over the fact that he should have positivley identifed his target before shooting. I can imagine the stress, fear etc but to shoot blindly is bad. At least the cop will be ok.

 

[Martlet]

I still can't get over the fact that he should have positivley identifed his target before shooting. I can imagine the stress, fear etc but to shoot blindly is bad. At least the cop will be ok.

I agree. That was one of the key points for me when the story first broke. However, the more I read reports (however that doesn't mean they are accurate), the more bits I pick up. Some of them talk about "a dim light on in the house". So try it yourself. Go into a room, turn off every other light in your house, and put on a "dim light". What do you see outside the door?

Now, it's 2:30 am. You got home late from vacation, and you're getting ready for bed. You have a dim light on in the bedroom. Maybe you hear something outside. Maybe you hear the door open. Maybe you hear someone coming up the stairs. Then you see a person, or two, standing in the shadows outside your door. Maybe you see they are holding something in their hand. Maybe I just made every single one of those scenarios up.

However, I certainly don't have enough information to say I wouldn't have done the same thing. I'd like to think I'd have been damn sure of my target before I pulled the trigger, though. Had that been an armed robber, which in all reality it sounds as though the police acted as one, had he waited he'd be dead.

 

[Lugnut]

I'd like to know just how the officers entered the home. Was it locked? If Ragsdale was getting ready for bed and shot an intruder in dim light I'd have hoped he locked his door first. Did the officers have their firearms drawn? Too many unknowns here.

 

[Martlet]

I'd like to know just how the officers entered the home. Was it locked? If Ragsdale was getting ready for bed and shot an intruder in dim light I'd have hoped he locked his door first. Did the officers have their firearms drawn? Too many unknowns here.

Read the whole article. It says that when he went on vacation, he left the key with a neighbor and had him as a contact with the alarm company. The neighbor unlocked the door and let the police in. The neighbor told the police the owner was on vacation and the home should be empty.

It sounds like a bunch of little things that led up to the shooting. Maybe he came home early. He wouldn't notify his neighbor at 0230 that he was home.

 

[Lugnut]

Read the whole article. It says that when he went on vacation, he left the key with a neighbor and had him as a contact with the alarm company. The neighbor unlocked the door and let the police in. The neighbor told the police the owner was on vacation and the home should be empty.

It sounds like a bunch of little things that led up to the shooting. Maybe he came home early. He wouldn't notify his neighbor at 0230 that he was home.

Ah, thank you, my bad. So far I think we are in agreement in this situation.

 

[taz-2005]

It sounds like a bunch of little things that led up to the shooting. Maybe he came home early. He wouldn't notify his neighbor at 0230 that he was home.

That sounds like the key to me. Also orignally reported was the fact that the alarm company cleared the alarm with him (Ragsdale) but did not call the police to notify them.

 

[Mike508]

So far, I'm siding with Mr. Ragsdale. Wonder of Mr. Sampson will reevaluate his policy allowing officers to silently enter a building?

The officers did not announce who they were and that they were entering the home. Such an announcement could be useful in certain circumstances, but could also give away an officer’s tactical advantage, depending on the situation, Chief Sampson said.

 

[rscalzo]

Entering locations that may be the site of a crime is part of the job. That isn't going to stop.

The fact is, the home owner failed to verify his target. What if it was his child enering the home at 2am unannounced? No one doubts it is anything more than a mistake but it's on the homeowner's head.

The bottom line is that he may not want the permit back. As of now, it is suspended, not revoked. Sad to say, but this doesn't help the cause of handgun ownership for defense of the home.

 

[Rockrivr1]

My first thought on this was that Mr Ragsdale is lucky to be alive. In a dark situation like that, how did the second officer in the house not return fire after the first officer was hit. The original story that I read indicated that both officers were proceeding to the second floor when the first was shot. If there was only a dim light on, the second officer shows either considerable constraint in not returning fire or he wasn't positioned right to cover his partner.

Can't say for sure as of course seeing we were not there, but either way Mr. Ragsdale is lucky he wasn't shot himself. While I understand that it's an active investigation, but I'm not sure I agree with suspending his license.

 

[rscalzo]

The suspension is probably more of a political move than anything else.

 

[Mike508]

Entering locations that may be the site of a crime is part of the job. That isn't going to stop.

The fact is, the home owner failed to verify his target. What if it was his child enering the home at 2am unannounced? No one doubts it is anything more than a mistake but it's on the homeowner's head.

The bottom line is that he may not want the permit back. As of now, it is suspended, not revoked. Sad to say, but this doesn't help the cause of handgun ownership for defense of the home.

Though I recognize that crime-scene entry is probable by LE, my query was in regard to LEOs doing so unannounced. There may be times when it is necessary to enter a building silently and times when entry should be broadcast loudly. Is this a case that would suggest that the policy be reevaluated?

 

[Len-2A Training]

I see a few problems with this discussion, so I ask that the readers please take the following into consideration. [NOTE: No criticism is being thrown at any individual, but just pointing out "tunnel vision" when reading by many.]

- The question of "how" the police got into the house keeps coming up. The answer has been given in each printed/referenced article: Neighbor with key let them in.

- Question of why didn't Ragsdale tell neighbor he was home early keeps coming up. I might have a neighbor or two that I'm friends with, but out of respect I am NOT going to call them at 0100hrs to tell them I'm home early! Neither did Ragsdale . . . I don't think you can blame him for that.

- Question of "could be his kids", etc. comes up. He MIGHT know something we don't . . . like his kids could be in Europe or live in CA. I'd guess that he knew it wouldn't be his kids arriving home unannounced at 0230hrs!

- Police procedure: Many Monday Morning Quarterbacks have never walked a mile in a cop's shoes and have no idea what cops really do outside of TV shows. Let me tell you from personal experience . . . when we responded to an alarm call we killed any strobe lights a block away from the scene, sirens even further away and literally rolled up on the house with NO lights on in the cruiser (yup kill the headlights too and park out of view of the house in question) if we felt it might be a real alarm at night. Tactical advantage! You'd like to catch the thieves in the act! We walked around the house quietly and observed and listened. Luckily I never had to clear a strange house at night.

- Shooting without knowing your target. This one is up for grabs and we are all "ass-u-me-ing" (sic) here. All decent alarms beep at the control panel when an alarmed door is opened. Thus he probably got that warning in his bedroom when the neighbor opened the door. I have lit light switches throughout the house and those tiny neon bulbs inside them give off enough light so that a person who lives there can make out shadows/walls/etc. fairly well. I can literally navigate my house in the dark using only the light of those light switches. Many fancy houses have skylights everywhere, which will also provide some light depending on weather conditions/phase of the Moon/etc.

We don't have tons of facts, but I'd bet that he could see their shadows adequate to make out that he was shooting at someone in dark clothes that didn't belong in his house at such an early hour.

Suspension of LTC after a shooting is SOP everywhere, whether justified or not. Earlier some of you were bitching that he was given preferential treatment due to wealth. Well just maybe it was procedural. The town that he lives in can NOT legally suspend his LTC, as they didn't issue it. So investigation and discussion with issuing chief took some time before it was suspended. Not an unusual occurrence.

 

[KMaurer]

But he did verify his target. It was someone approaching him in his locked home at night without his authorization. Did it turn out that there was a actual threat to him? No, not in this instance. Did he have a reasonable basis for believing that there was a threat? Absolutely yes. Turn it around a bit. If an officer shoots an unarmed guy who suddenly appears a few feet in front of him while he's investigating a dark alley, I doubt we'd be saying "but he didn't verify his target". Sure the ACLU and all the usual apologists for the career criminals and street crazies would be, but I seriously doubt we would. Even when you do things right, shit can still happen.

Ken

 

[rscalzo]

And once again Ken and I don't see it the same way. He identified "A" target but not what that target was to any great degree. Not knowing his situation and household situation makes this discussion somewhat theory, could it have been another household member? A warning by the homeowner might have avoided the situation.

In any case, we can play the "what if" game forever and keep coming up with different answers.

 

[Martlet]

And once again Ken and I don't see it the same way. He identified "A" target but not what that target was to any great degree. Not knowing his situation and household situation makes this discussion somewhat theory, could it have been another household member? A warning by the homeowner might have avoided the situation.

In any case, we can play the "what if" game forever and keep coming up with different answers.

I keep hearing "could it be another family member". People need to at least read the information provided before forming an opinion.

The article states that his wife and kids were still on vacation. He came home late. He knew he was in the home alone. He knew nobody else was supposed to be in the house. Then he saw/heard someone sneaking through his house.

Should he have verified his target? Of course. However, he was in his own home. He knew he was alone. A warning from the cops might have avoided the situation.

 

[rscalzo]

Family

And yet he wasn't supposed to be home either.

Year back one of our residents also through someone broke into his home. He then shot and killed a family member thinking it was an intruder. There is no way to spin this into a postive. The best anyone can hope for is to use it as a learning experience.

 

[taz-2005]

But he did verify his target. It was someone approaching him in his locked home at night without his authorization. Did it turn out that there was a actual threat to him? No, not in this instance. Did he have a reasonable basis for believing that there was a threat? Absolutely yes. Turn it around a bit. If an officer shoots an unarmed guy who suddenly appears a few feet in front of him while he's investigating a dark alley, I doubt we'd be saying "but he didn't verify his target". Sure the ACLU and all the usual apologists for the career criminals and street crazies would be, but I seriously doubt we would. Even when you do things right, shit can still happen.

Ken

Reason #1 my Surefire and my pistol are always together.

 

[SiameseRat]

The best anyone can hope for is to use it as a learning experience.

+1

We can speculate 'til the cows come home. It's a screwed up situation for everyone involved- I think we can all agree on that.

 

[taz-2005]

A wise man once told me that in a crisis situation people don't rise to the occasiaon, they sink to the level of their training.

 

[Martlet]

And yet he wasn't supposed to be home either.

Year back one of our residents also through someone broke into his home. He then shot and killed a family member thinking it was an intruder. There is no way to spin this into a postive. The best anyone can hope for is to use it as a learning experience.

So you're equating a neighbor not knowing he came home early with a home owner who had JUST RETURNED HOME FROM VACATION not knowing that his family WAS STILL ON VACATION AND NOT IN THE HOUSE?

Please. Give me a break. If you're going to stretch to prove a point, at least be logical about it.

 

[rscalzo]

Once again you are guessing about facts that we don't have in front of use. Did every family member go on vacation? Maybe some were at another location? We don't know. We can do the "what if game" all day. This was a mistake and it won't change the fact that he shot at a target that he didn't identify.

 

[KMaurer]

And yet he wasn't supposed to be home either.

Year back one of our residents also through someone broke into his home. He then shot and killed a family member thinking it was an intruder. There is no way to spin this into a postive. The best anyone can hope for is to use it as a learning experience.

I don't belive I've seen a single post that has attempted to spin this into anything vaguely like positive. I've been saying from the beginning that it was a tragic situation, thankfully one that seems to have been less than fatal. OTOH, I've been around the block enough times that I know that even when everybody involved does everything right, bad thing can still happen. As far as I can tell, this seems to be one of those cases. Sure we can all sit here Monday morning after the game and come up with a long list of things that the alarm company, the home owner and the police might have done that might have altered the outcome. Always good for thought, but I haven't read anything to make me believe that the home onwer was "wrong" any more than the police officer was "wrong" or anybody else was.

Ken

 

[Len-2A Training]

Folks we really are going to the ridiculous here!

We don't know much more than we read, we can assume all day/night and it'll prove nothing and change nobody's mind.

Since so many like assumptions . . . here's a few more:

- If I returned home early from vacation, leaving the family behind, I'd have called my family (at their vacation spot) when I arrived home to tell them that I arrived safely. NOT likely that they'd forget to mention that they were on the way home and would arrive in 15 minutes!

- If I see a shadow that is 6' tall, broad shouldered, dressed in all black . . . I'd have a pretty good idea it wasn't my Wife (5'4", small to medium build and never dresses in all black)! Thus, I would have ID'd my target as someone who doesn't belong here . . . even if I don't know his name and who he works for!

- Don't know about you, but when my Wife arrives home she shouts out "hello" as she enters. Just a habit and I do the same. Another means of ID'g folks that belong there.

 

[Martlet]

Once again you are guessing about facts that we don't have in front of use. Did every family member go on vacation? Maybe some were at another location? We don't know. We can do the "what if game" all day. This was a mistake and it won't change the fact that he shot at a target that he didn't identify.

Did you even read the article?

 

[rscalzo]

I read what was made available here. I don't have acess to the paper. I've also had dealings with the press for a lot of years and learned that what is printed is usually far from accurate. Unless access to the investigation and statements is possible, no true determination can be made beyond it was a trdic accident.

What I see happening through the course of this discussion is moving from the actual incident to a discussion of tactics. They are two separate areas. Tactics would have mandated suplimental lighting. Once again, many who purchase a handgun for home defense fail to obtain any training even what is available at local clubs. Many do not even seek out information available in such areas such as this forum. Training possibly might have avoided this situation.

 

[Martlet]

I read what was made available here. I don't have acess to the paper. I've also had dealings with the press for a lot of years and learned that what is printed is usually far from accurate. Unless access to the investigation and statements is possible, no true determination can be made beyond it was a trdic accident.

Then what is your point?

 

[FeeBear]

Hey Guys,

I have a question for all LEO or Former LE. When responding to either a BE or a regular traffic stop is the officer told that the owner (home or car) is a holder of a LTC? I am the last person to try and use my limited brain power in the conversation to try and Monday Morning Quarterback. My question is rather a simple procedure question. Would an officer treat the situation differently knowing the owner/possible burglar might have a gun?

Fee