# LAPD OIS at North Hollywood Burlington Coat Factory



## RodneyFarva (Jan 18, 2007)

North Hollywood: On December 23, 2021, around 11:45 a.m., North Hollywood officers responded to a radio call for an Assault with a Deadly Weapon in Progress, at a business, on the 12100 block of Victory Boulevard. While enroute to the location, officers received multiple radio calls from the same location that there was a possible shooting in progress and that there were individuals sheltering in place. As the officers arrived at the location, they began a search for the suspect. During that search, officers located a female who was suffering from various injuries and bleeding. They encountered the suspect a short distance away and an officer involved shooting occurred. The suspect was struck by gunfire and taken into custody. Fire department paramedics responded and determined the suspect deceased at scene. One victim was transported to the hospital for injuries sustained as a result of the suspect’s attack and was admitted in unknown condition at this time. Unbeknownst to the officers, a 14-year-old girl was in a changing room behind a wall, that was directly behind the suspect and out of the officers’ view. She was in the changing area with her mother when the officers encountered the suspect and the officer involved shooting occurred. During a search for additional suspects and victims, officers found the girl and discovered she had been struck by gunfire. She was pronounced dead at the scene. At this preliminary phase of the investigation, it is believed that victim was struck by one of the rounds fired by an officer at the suspect. Police Chief Michel R. Moore commented: “This chaotic incident resulting in the death of an innocent child is tragic and devastating for everyone involved. I am profoundly sorry for the loss of this young girl’s life and I know there are no words that can relieve the unimaginable pain for the family. My commitment is to conduct a thorough, complete and transparent investigation into the circumstances that led up to this tragedy and provide the family and public with as much information as possible. I have directed the release of the critical incident video by Monday, December 27th, which will include the 9-1-1 calls, radio transmissions, body worn video and any CCTV and other evidence gathered at this preliminary stage.” Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1506 (AB 1506), the California Attorney General’s Office will be investigating and will independently review the officer-involved-shooting. The California Department of Justice’s California Police Shooting Investigation Team for Southern California deployed to the scene of the OIS. Alongside other law enforcement partners, the California Department of Justice is investigating the incident. Once the investigation has been completed, it will be turned over to the California Department of Justice’s Special Prosecutions Section within the Criminal Law Division for independent review. The Los Angeles Police Department Family Liaison is working closely with the Mayor’s Crisis Response Team and Council Member Monica Rodriguez to provide assistance to the 14-year-old girl’s family.


----------



## RodneyFarva (Jan 18, 2007)

http://lapd-assets.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/UOF_Policy_Redline.pdf



* 556.10 POLICY ON THE USE OF FORCE.

PREAMBLE TO USE OF FORCE*. The use of force by members of law enforcement is a matter of critical concern both to the public and the law enforcement community. It is recognized that some individuals will not comply with the law or submit to control unless compelled to do so by the use of force; therefore, law enforcement officers are sometimes called upon to use force in the performance of their duties. It is The Los Angeles Police Department also recognizes that members of law enforcement derive their authority from the public and therefore must be ever mindful that they are not only the guardians but also the servants of the public.

The Department’s guiding principle when using force shall be reverence for human life. Officers shall attempt to control an incident by using time, distance, communication, and available resources in an effort to de-escalate the situation, whenever it is safe, feasible and reasonable to do so. As stated below, when warranted, Department personnel may use objectively reasonable force to carry out their duties. Officers may use deadly force only when they reasonably believe, based on the totality of circumstances, that such force is necessary in defense of human life. Officers who use unreasonable force degrade the confidence of the community we serve, expose fellow officers to physical hazards, violate the law and rights of individuals upon whom unreasonable force or unnecessary deadly force is used, and subject the Department and themselves to potential civil and criminal liability. Conversely, officers who fail to use force when warranted may endanger themselves, the community and fellow officers. 

*POLICY.

Use of De-Escalation Techniques.* It is the policy of this Department that, whenever feasible, officers shall use techniques and tools consistent with Department de-escalation training to reduce the intensity of any encounter with a suspect and enable an officer to have additional options to mitigate the need to use a higher level of force while maintaining control of the situation.

*Verbal Warnings.* Where feasible, a peace officer shall, prior to the use of any force, make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as a peace officer and to warn that force may be used, unless the officer has objectively reasonable grounds to believe that the person is aware of those facts.

*Proportionality.* Officers may only use a level of force that they reasonably believe is proportional to the seriousness of the suspected offense or the reasonably perceived level of actual or threatened resistance.

*Fair and Unbiased Policing.* Officers shall carry out their duties, including use of force, in a manner that is fair and unbiased. Discriminatory conduct on the basis of race, religion, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, housing status, or disability while preforming any law enforcement activity is prohibited

*Use of Force − Non-Deadly.* It is the policy of this Department that personnel may use only that force which is “objectively reasonable” to:

• Defend themselves; 
• Defend others; 
• Effect an arrest or detention; 
• Prevent escape; or, 
• Overcome resistance.

Factors Used to Determine Objective Reasonableness. The Department examines reasonableness using Graham v Connor and the articulated facts from the perspective of a Los Angeles Police Officer with similar training and experience, in the same situation, based on the totality of circumstances Pursuant to the opinion issued by the United States Supreme Court in Graham v. Connor, the Department examines the reasonableness of any particular force used: a) from the perspective of a reasonable Los Angeles Police Officer with similar training and experience, in the same situation; and b) based on the facts and circumstances of each particular case. In determining the appropriate level of force, officers shall evaluate each situation in light of the circumstances of each particular case. Those factors may include, but are not limited to:

• The feasibility of using de-escalation tactics, crisis intervention or other alternatives to force; 
• The seriousness of the crime or suspected offense; 
• The level of threat or resistance presented by the subject; 
• Whether the subject was posing an immediate threat to officers or a danger to the community; 
• The potential for injury to citizens, officers or subjects; 
• The risk or apparent attempt by the subject to escape; 
• The conduct of the subject being confronted (as reasonably perceived by the officer at the time); 
• The amount of time and any changing circumstances during which the officer had to determine the type and amount of force that appeared to be reasonable; 
• The availability of other resources; 
• The training and experience of the officer; 
• The proximity or access of weapons to the subject; 
• Officer versus subject factors such as age, size, relative strength, skill level, injury/exhaustion and number of officers versus subjects; and, 
• The environmental factors and/or other exigent circumstances.

*Drawing or Exhibiting Firearms*. Unnecessarily or prematurely drawing or exhibiting a firearm limits an officer’s alternatives in controlling a situation, creates unnecessary anxiety on the part of citizens, and may result in an unwarranted or accidental discharge of the firearm. Officers shall not draw or exhibit a firearm unless the circumstances surrounding the incident create a reasonable belief that it may be necessary to use the firearm. When an officer has determined that the use of deadly force is not necessary, the officer shall, as soon as practicable, secure or holster the firearm. Any drawing and exhibiting of a firearm shall conform with this policy on the use of firearms. Moreover, any intentional pointing of a firearm at a person by an officer shall be reported. Such reporting will be published in the Department’s year-end use of force report.

*Use of Force − Deadly.* It is the policy of this Department that officers shall use deadly force upon another person only when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of circumstances, that such force is necessary for either of the following reasons:

• To defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to another person; or
• To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended.

In determining whether deadly force is necessary, officers shall evaluate each situation in light of the particular circumstances of each case and shall use other available resources and techniques if reasonably safe and feasible. Before discharging a firearm, officers shall consider their surroundings and potential risks to bystanders to the extent reasonable under the circumstances.

*Note:* Because the application of deadly force is limited to the above scenarios, an officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger that person poses to themselves, if an objectively reasonable officer would believe the person does not pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.

*Department’s Evaluation of Deadly Force.* The Department will analyze an officer’s use of deadly force by evaluating the totality of the circumstances of each case consistent with California Penal Code Section 835(a) as well as the factors articulated in Graham v. Connor.

Rendering Aid. After any use of force, officers shall promptly provide basic and emergency medical assistance to all members of the community, including victims, witnesses, subjects, suspects, persons in custody, subjects of a use of force and fellow officers:

 To the extent of the officer’s training and experience in first aid/CPR/AED; and
 To the level of equipment available to an officer at the time assistance is needed.

Warning Shots. It is the policy of this Department that warning shots shall only be used in exceptional circumstances where it might reasonably be expected to avoid the need to use deadly force. Generally, warning shots shall be directed in a manner that minimizes the risk of injury to innocent persons, ricochet dangers and property damage. Shooting at or From Moving Vehicles. It is the policy of this Department that firearms shall not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless a person in the vehicle is immediately threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle. The moving vehicle itself shall not presumptively constitute a threat that justifies an officer’s use of deadly force. An officer threatened by an oncoming vehicle shall move out of its path instead of discharging a firearm at it or any of its occupants. Firearms shall not be discharged from a moving vehicle, except in exigent circumstances and consistent with this policy regarding the use of Deadly Force.

Note: It is understood that the policy regarding discharging a firearm at or from a moving vehicle may not cover every situation that may arise. In all situations, officers are expected to act with intelligence and exercise sound judgment, attending to the spirit of this policy. Any deviations from the provisions of this policy shall be examined rigorously on a case by case basis. The involved officer must be able to clearly articulate the reasons for the use of deadly force. Factors that may be considered include whether the officer’s life or the lives of others were in immediate peril and there was no reasonable or apparent means of escape.

Requirement to Report Potential Excessive Force. An officer who is present and observes another officer using force that the present and observing officer believes to be beyond that which is necessary, as determined by an objectively reasonable officer under the circumstances based upon the totality of information actually known to the officer, shall report such force to a superior officer.

Requirement to Intercede When Excessive Force is Observed. An officer shall intercede when present and observing another officer using force that is clearly beyond that which is necessary, as determined by an objectively reasonable officer under the circumstances, taking into account the possibility that other officers may have additional information regarding the threat posed by a subject.

*DEFINITIONS.

Deadly Force.*
Deadly force is defined as any use of force that creates a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury, including but not limited to, the discharge of a firearm. Feasible. Feasible means reasonably capable of being done or carried out under the circumstances to successfully achieve the arrest or lawful objective without increasing risk to the officer or another person.

*Imminent.* Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 835a(e)(2), “[A] threat of death or serious bodily injury is “imminent” when, based on the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable officer in the same situation would believe that a person has the present ability, opportunity, and apparent intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or another person. An imminent harm is not merely a fear of future harm, no matter how great the fear and no matter how great the likelihood of the harm, but is one that, from appearances, must be instantly confronted and addressed.”

*Necessary.* In addition to California Penal Code 835(a), the Department shall evaluate whether deadly force was necessary by looking at: a) the totality of the circumstances from the perspective of a reasonable Los Angeles Police Officer with similar training and experience; b) the factors used to evaluate whether force is objectively reasonable; c) an evaluation of whether the officer exhausted the available and feasible alternatives to deadly force; and d) whether a warning was feasible and/or given

*Objectively Reasonable.* The legal standard used to determine the lawfulness of a use of force is based on the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). Graham states, in part, “The reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments − in circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving − about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation. The test of reasonableness is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application.”

The force must be reasonable under the circumstances known to or reasonably believed by the officer at the time the force was used. Therefore, the Department examines all uses of force from an objective standard rather than a subjective standard.

*Serious Bodily Injury.* Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 243(f)(4) Serious Bodily Injury includes but is not limited to:
• Loss of consciousness;
• Concussion;
• Bone Fracture;
• Protracted loss or impairment of function of any bodily member or organ;
• A wound requiring extensive suturing; and,
• Serious disfigurement.

*Totality of the Circumstances*. All facts known to or reasonably perceived by the officer at the time, including the conduct of the officer and the subject leading up to the use of force.

*Warning Shots*. The intentional discharge of a firearm off target not intended to hit a person, to warn others that deadly force is imminent.


----------



## Hush (Feb 1, 2009)

Glad to see in 2021 one of the biggest police departments in the country is running a 40+ year old 20" Colt SP-1 with 4x ACOG mounted on a carry handle. At indoor ranges that's only a 4-6" offset, whats the worst that could happen.....oh wait.


----------



## RodneyFarva (Jan 18, 2007)

I started to have Vietnam flash backs and I'm only 41. For a quick second I thought I could also hear CCR "fortunate son" in the background.

Doc-J and 8-ball are wasted, and you know that.


----------



## Kilvinsky (Jan 15, 2007)

I'm curious as to what the outcome will be. I usually don't watch many of these because I've always said, I wasn't there, I cannot truly judge. But I can't help but wonder why the nut was shot. Again, I was NOT there and I'm NOT second guessing, just wondering.


----------



## Hush (Feb 1, 2009)

I think initial reports said active shooter, they see a blood trail, and a guy attacking a downed woman ....good shoot to me armed or not. Would be curious to see if it was a miss, riccochet, or pass through and what kind of ammo they're using. Feel bad for the guy, he pushed his way to the front of the train to get his shot off ..and will have to live with the consequences. I don't feel he should bear culpability, this seems like just one of those tragic outcomes. 

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk


----------



## LA Copper (Feb 11, 2005)

It was a ricochet off the floor. My guess is with the adrenaline rush, he mashed on the first shot. I forget what type of ammo we use for rifles but I'll try to find out. The rifle officer pushed his way through to the front because that's what he was taught to do. In a potential active shooter incident, we want the rifle at the front of the diamond formation.

We'll see how our current district attorney handles it. Think of Rachel Rawlings times 10. The state attorney general is also involved in the investigation, which isn't a good thing. They only get involved when they think the shooting might not be justified.

It's only a guess on my part but the officer may have thought the bike lock was a gun because of the multiple calls of a man with a gun and a possible active shooter situation, like Hush mentioned


----------



## RodneyFarva (Jan 18, 2007)

Hush said:


> I think initial reports said active shooter, they see a blood trail, and a guy attacking a downed woman ....good shoot to me armed or not. Would be curious to see if it was a miss, riccochet, or pass through and what kind of ammo they're using. Feel bad for the guy, he pushed his way to the front of the train to get his shot off ..and will have to live with the consequences. I don't feel he should bear culpability, this seems like just one of those tragic outcomes.
> 
> Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk


Agreed all day, this was a lightning strike, thats one in a trillion shot. The only thing I would scrutinize is the cop didn't give him any commands "Stop" "Police" or "drop it" but that is a miniscule point to make when given the totality of all circumstances. 

You have to look at it as this: 

A, They got called to an active shooter. 
+
B, Upon arrival people running out one the store. 
+
C, They have to make a quick entrance. 
+
D, A female can be observed down and bleeding. 
+
E, They find the threat armed with a blunt object. 
+
F, Very much like a reflex, the cop's body knew what to do before his brain could even process what is happing. 
+
G, Press, press, press.
+
H, The hostile threat is down and out. 
+
I, Assess the situation and render aid.

All of this equals: A good shoot. 

However, there is a unforeseen and unpredictable veritable that may, or may not happen. Its a veritable that, sure you can try and train for it and plan ahead, but in the end you have no control over it. It's collateral damage that resulted in a death of a child. Its a horrible thing that is no fault of the officer yet he will still have to bare this on his shoulders for the rest of his life.


----------

