Alleged PS3 Thief Shot Dead by Police

[Irreverend IX]

For one gamer, the PlayStation 3 delivered the ultimate in realistic shooting action...

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4325&Itemid=2

"When officers came to college student Peyton Strickland’s rental home to arrest him, he reportedly answered the door and was shot multiple times by police after they broke down the door and exchanged words. Strickland's dog was also shot and killed in the incident.

On PS3’s U.S. launch date on November 17, another college student, Justin Raines, had bought two of the hard-to-find consoles at a Wal-Mart. When he got back to his apartment, two assailants attacked him with a blunt object and made off with the systems. Strickland was allegedly one of the attackers, and the other is believed to be 20-year-old student Ryan David Mills, who was arrested Friday under the same charges as Strickland. The two were accused of armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon and breaking and entering."

[Lone_Star_Dem]

1. Does this seem conflicting to anyone else?

"He reportedly answered the door and was shot multiple times by police after they broke down the door."

Why would they break down the door if he had answered it?

Also, they used a blunt object, not a gun in their attacks, which lowers his risk level. It would have been much smarter to catch him unaware leaving his residence.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. Apparently he wanted to see a warrant, and they didn't have one.

So they busted down the door and shot him.

:shrug:

[Lone_Star_Dem]

4. Who knows

That's a possibility for sure. The very fact that he had a roommate, who it implies was at home at the time, should have been reason enough for them not to have went to such extremes.

[Pavulon]

14. They had a felony warrant

this happened down the road from me. Just like all felony warrants with violent criminals they used an entry team.

The entered his property with the intent to arrest him.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

31. There are better ways to execute a warrant

As I said above, he used a blunt weapon, not a gun. This alone lowered his risk level, then they also hold the responsibility of the well being of his roommate in their hands.

This could have been done in a fashion where shots were not fired, which is supposed to be the overall desire when serving a warrant.

[Pavulon]

42. You are right

something certainly went wrong. I can't remember the last police shooting in wilmington. They are rare, and that PD arrests lots of people.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

89. Entry team?

Oh, boy!

[Pavulon]

93. Jesus,

that is 4 guys. On felony calls the police usually bring more than one officer. It does not mean swat and flash grenades.

This is in a small town.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

95. Jesus is doing bust and bakes?

[Pavulon]

97. If this was a drug case

no one would notice. Shootings are rare in wilmington. Police arrest bezillions of people without incident. from an article down thread looks like he came to the door with a play station controller of gold game club, that looks like a pistol.

Who knows. Just saying this is far from normal in wilmington.

That was a exclamation of exasperation..

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. hey he was an economic terra-ist.

If you steal retail, the cops can and should shoot first, ask questions maybe never.
If you steal wholesale, say, like haliburton, Enron, Global Crossing, then the authorities are there to protect you.

when corpserations and huge financial interests are more important than the rights of a guy, unarmed, in his home, who DARES ask for a warrant, then our society is sick. Time to change how we treat corpserations.

[OneBlueSky]

5. this is beyond obscene . . . stealing a PS3 may be a crime, but . . .

it sure as hell isn't a capital offense . . .

[karlrschneider]

10. Hard for me to feel sorry for the robber

"The sheriff said the robbery victim had waited three days in line to buy two Playstation 3 units for $641 each at a Wal-Mart. He was unloading the units at his campus apartment when one man beat him to the ground while another took the PlayStations, Causey said."

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

13. alledged robber.

What's with all the people going on about unjust violent treatment towards criminals? Does it make them feel macho? Are they sexually insecure?

[Pavulon]

15. Alleged unjust

if he is alleged to have committed a crime the treatment he received should not be judged to the facts are in.

Facts:

He had a felony warrant served for a violent criminal act. These are common.

During that process he was shot. How that happened determines if a crime was committed.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. So why did they fail to provide a copy of the warrant?

Shooting a person for stealing a PS3 is unjust, period.

[Pavulon]

22. I have followed this on local news

he did not steal it, he beat someone with a weapon and then stole it.

They had a felony warrant to serve on an armed suspect.

A copy is available from the new hanover county criminal clerks office.

How can you say period about something that has yet to be laid out and vetted for truth?

Your opinion is noted.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. Again, why did they fail to provide a warrant?

I say period, because there's absolutely no reason to shoot somebody over a PS3. The police are not judge, jury, and executioner. Now if it were self defense, that's something else. But with all the cases of police shooting 88 year old ladies and grooms in what appears to be just plain murder, I'd like to see some evidence of self defense.

[Pavulon]

29. That is what the investigation will

prove. If they screwed up they will pay. He is not a crackhead. So someone will pay attention.

If they had a warrant the would show it. If they followed him from the scene of the crime they have probable cause to enter and don't need one.

They did not shoot him for fun, they shot him because they thought he was armed.

This is not nyc, this is a small nc PD arresting a white kid. Pretty common in Wilmington. Plenty of UNCW students get arrested without incident.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. "If they had a warrant the would show it."

Well, apparently, according to witnesses, they didn't show it. That would imply they didn't have a warrant.

"That is what the investigation will prove. If they screwed up they will pay."

:rofl:

[Pavulon]

36. Dude where do you live?

I live in this state and have family in Wilmington. They either had a felony warrant or probable cause to arrest him for a felony.

This is not the wild west. It is a small town with very low crime rates. The police there arrest uncw students all the time and dont just shoot them.

The witness was 1 person who may have been on the warrant himself.

Imply is fine. The reality is that they will have an investigation by the sbi, who is independent and publish a public finding. If the officers broke policy they will be treated accordingly.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. The United States of America.

It's a place where the only reason to shoot somebody is in defense. Where cops need a warrant to bust down the door. And police are not judges, juries, and executioners.

"This is not the wild west."

That's precisely my point.

"If the officers broke policy they will be treated accordingly."

:rofl:

[Pavulon]

41. A new york state of mind

does not work in wilmington, nc. The police can, in this state, and in NY i presume, follow a suspects statement and get a warrant or follow up at a persons residence and arrest them on probable cause. They do not have to have paper warrant in hand to arrest you.

If you get mugged and beaten with a bat and you say my neighbor paul did it the police can knock on his door and arrest him on the spot. If paul comes to the door covered in you blood they can enter and arrest him. To enter and search they need a warrant. To arrest you they do NOT.

As I said this is not a daily thing here. Police shootings in wilmington are very rare.

If he came to the door with a black thing in his hands and failed to follow instructions the police could have BELIEVED him armed and shot him.

If they BELIEVED the black thing was a pistol and not a wireless controller they are clear.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

45. LOL. Y'all do things diffently down there, eh?

[Pavulon]

46. Nice

Yes the Wilmington police kill college students all the time. You see there are these things called states and they have different laws on police powers and process.

So if you live in nyc, or atlanta the process for locking your ass in jail differs.

But yes wilmington is a stereotypical town in the south where the police and residents hate blacks and hippies, a terrible place to live.

PS if you live in new jersey pass the word, we are full, no more beach property for sale and the pd is insane.

get a grip

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

53. Oh, can it.

If you can dish it out, but can't take it, you shouldn't have gone down the weird regional differences tangent while flailing for a real argument.

[Pavulon]

63. get a grip

the cops shot him during a felony warrant. The investigation will show what the circumstances really are. Either the cops made a horrible error and possibly committed a crime or he took actions that put the police in a position to shoot.

Any person who claims to have facts at this point is full of it.

Regional difference is that unlike nyc and atlanta police shootings are rare in Wilmington. Small town.

There are none of the usual social pinch points here. If he was shot during a drug raid this would stay regional news.

The only reason it is news is "ps3"

[Ms. Clio]

119. they did not follow him -- the robbery occurred on November 17

The shooting just happened today, yes? So now why doesn't he have a right to see a warrant again? That part really confuses the hell out of me.

[Pavulon]

122. Arrest warrant requires no paper copy in nc

if you are charged the arresting officer does not require a piece of paper to haul your ass in. If they want to search for what you stole they need a warrant signed by a judge..

You know how big of a pain in the ass it would be to have to get a judge's signature to arrest every person jailed.

[Ms. Clio]

125. But they didn't merely arrest him, they broke down his door and entered his home

According to the Pocket Card from the ACLU:

IN YOUR HOME
1. If the police knock and ask to enter your home, you don't have to admit them unless they have a warrant signed by a judge.

2. However, in some emergency situations (like when a person is screaming for help inside, or when the police are chasing someone) officers are allowed to enter and search your home without a warrant.

3. If you are arrested, the police can search you and the area close by. If you are in a building, "close by" usually means just the room you are in.


So is that how arrests like this are usually made, by busting down doors without warrants? I really don't know much about these things, in your state or my own.

[Pavulon]

126. If they broke his door down

to arrest him and not to search his residence I THINK it is legal. Again I would want to check on it.

However I know they can get no knock warrants that require a judges signature.

I am not 100% sure so I will not try and give a BS answer.

[Ms. Clio]

127. okay, thanks for the judicious response

would they have to show the no knock warrant upon request?

[Pavulon]

128. not sure

but that sounds reasonable for a warrant they would carry, like a search warrant. I will ask one of the people I work with. He used to be a county magistrate.

[karlrschneider]

129. See my post # 121

It is the case in every state that I know of.

edit for correct post #

[Ms. Clio]

131. okay, thanks again

[karlrschneider]

130. Yes, that is generally true (I'm a very long time ACLU member)

see my post # 121 for some more details.

[TX-RAT]

145. Maybe i can help

If i have a felony warrant for your arrest, the first thing I'm going to do is take you into custody.

Arresting officer's don't carry arrest warrants with them. They simply radio in and confirm there is a warrant.

[1monster]

105. According to the roommate, the shooting victim and he were sitting

playing video games when there was a knock on the door.

Strickland was closest to the door and got up to answer the door, but before he was able to open it, the police/deputies broke down the door shot Strickland and knocked the roommate to the floor, and held a gun to his head while he was on the floor....

Doesn't sound like outstanding and stellar police work to me.

[Pavulon]

107. Never said it was..

However the SBI will investigate. If the police were in the wrong they will be held accountable. Wilmington is a small town, police shootings are very rare.

What they were doing and had in their hands at the time of the warrant being served is relevant. We don't know that yet.

[karlrschneider]

17. Bullshit. If I had witnessed the crime, I would have shot the bastard on

the spot. I guess if the victim wasn't your sister you don't care...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. Does that make you feel macho to say that?

The only legitimate reason to shoot somebody is in self defense. What's this bullshit about witnessing?

[karlrschneider]

20. Ignored

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

21. Dodged.

[Pavulon]

23. Wrong

You can use deadly force to defend someone or to stop a felony. So if i see you getting beaten with a bat by 2 guy I can stop them, by asking politely or by shooting them with no warning.

That is the law in the state of NC.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. No, you can't use deadly force to stop a felony....

unless there's reason to believe somebody's life is in danger.

And we're not talking during the course of a felony, we're talking about serving a warrant on the guy's home.

[Pavulon]

33. I have a

concealed carry license and know for a FACT a private citizen can draw a weapon to stop a felony where life is at risk. If I see someone stealing my car I can order them at gunpoint to stop. If they do not and they are on my property after dark i can shoot. In that situation i would not. I have had this discussion with police and am comfortable with the laws in my state.

You can draw a weapon on someone stealing your car and order them to stop at walmart, however you can not shoot unless you FEEL you life is in danger.

However if a person witnesses a 2 on one beating (by definition life threatening and a cause for use of deadly force) you can use deadly force to stop it. To protect the life of another.

These laws very from state to state. So unless you are up on NC law you are probably just guessing. I am not.

I never said they could shoot him later, I am saying they served a felony warrant. They were arresting someone who they believed committed a violent crime. If he was a simple arrest they would not serve the warrant in the same manner.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. key phrase "when life is at risk."

In other words, you can shoot somebody if you think they're going to kill you, if you shoot somebody after the fact because they're stole your car that you're just a plain old fashioned murderer.

"So unless you are up on NC law you are probably just guessing."

Seems I'm more up on it than you.

"I never said they could shoot him later, I am saying they served a felony warrant."

This means later.

"They were arresting someone who they believed committed a violent crime."

No, they believed they were arresting somebody suspected of committing a violent crime.

[Pavulon]

38. Your opinion is noted

but NO you are just wrong. In NC the statute is all about frame of mind. If you reasonably think you life is at risk you can shoot.

You are shifting context, a fun but silly game. You can not shoot someone driving off in your car. If they are driving towards you can.

But i digress...

They were serving a felony warrant. That means they had a suspect who was reportedly armed.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

39. I'm the one changing context?

:rofl:

[Pavulon]

43. ....

<exception> content expected.

[benEzra]

159. The key word being "reasonably."

In NC the statute is all about frame of mind. If you reasonably think you life is at risk you can shoot.

I am also a NC CHL holder, and would simply point out that the legal definition of "reasonable belief" is that the average mentally sound adult would have seen the situation the same way. If you believe you are threatened, but your belief is irrational, then your claim of self-defense will not be upheld.

NC self-defense law does only allow the use of lethal force to counter an imminent, unlawful attack involving the likelihood of death or serious bodily harm, or a forcible felony such as rape. Not just any felony (i.e., you can't shoot someone for stealing your TV, writing a bad check, or driving off with your car, or for simple assault).

You can not shoot someone driving off in your car. If they are driving towards you can.

Only because a car is a lethal weapon, and driving toward you in an attempt to run you over is no different than running at you with a knife outstretched, or aiming a gun at you. It doesn't matter if they're driving your car, or theirs; it's the attempt to hit you that would make self-defense justifiable in that situation.

[wuushew]

48. What a waste of money

for the price of a concealed firearm you could have made donations to the DNC or AIDS relief.

[Pavulon]

49. $80

If I remember from like 6 years ago. $30 a year or something to keep two. one for my wife who works odd hours at a hospital, which is (as usual) in the most dangerous part of town. I took the course with her. I rarely carry a weapon. The total cost of both weapons was under $1100.

My wife and I do ok and make significant political and charitable donations.

[Llewlladdwr]

162. ROFL...

Sorry, but I'd rather have a gun in my pocket than a Democrat in Congress....At least the gun will be there when I need it.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karlrschneider]

54. Stopping an armed robbery is republican? Fine, I guess I am one then.

:eyes:

[Richard Steele]

64. Wow, Karl, you really don't sound like yourself today.

What's up?

[karlrschneider]

70. Well, I'm not sure what you mean...have I ever defended anyone's right to

assault and rob anybody? If I did, I'll have to say that was a time when I wasn't myself. I'm not
supporting (or opposing) what the cops did at the suspect's house*, my comment was if I had seen the
crime -being committed-. You might know I worked my way through college as a cop in Tulsa and I've
told many stories of atrocities I observed done by policeman - and that many times I bypassed the 'good old boy' chain of command and reported incidents to a certain VVIP who was a good friend of mine which got some action without me getting in the middle.

* because I don't know precisely what happened at that house, I wasn't there.
KS

[Richard Steele]

94. No, and I sure would be unpleasantly surprised if you ever did!

But generally, you've always seemed to me
to be the "calm, well-reasoned" type.
You just seemed to be "posting from the hip" there,
and I was very surprised to see it, so I asked about it.

Over time, you have become a "point of reference" for me here at DU;
You are one of the names I click on FIRST to get an OBJECTIVE
opinion to help me cut through the all hyperbole in any given flamefest.

You know you said: "* because I don't know precisely what
happened at that house, I wasn't there."...
Generally, I would expect to find you smacking thoughtless fools in the face
with that kind of comment, not tacking it on as an afterthought.

But, whatever...I'm not trying to criticize you, and I wouldn't even know how
to do that if I wanted to.
I've never been a cop, I've never even been to college,
let alone "worked my way through" one.

I just wondered if everything was OK with you tonight, because
you seemed a little EDGY, that's all.

[karlrschneider]

96. It's okay, thank you for the kind words and sometimes I deserve criticism.

Maybe I am a little edgy, I fell on my ass going out to the mailbox this afternoon on the ice. It's sore as hell. :-)

Shoulda dug out the ice skates I guess...haha

[Richard Steele]

108. LIFE imitates ART imitating a lifelike portrait painted from a photo?

I swear, I *almost* used a "bear with a sore ass" metaphor in my last
post, but decided against it during the second edit!

You take care of that- don't laugh it off just because it's funny.
Trust me, when your leg still occasionally gives out for no reason
ten years later, the humor is long gone.

[karlrschneider]

112. If I'm still around in 10 more years, that'll be reward enough!

I played recreational hockey for years, if I had a buck for every time I've fallen on my butt, I'd get me a new Mercedes! :D

[Pavulon]

12. They beat someone and robbed them by force

they did not shoplift it. That act is justification for the victim to have shot them both dead during the crime. two on 1 assault and the weapon make that legal at the time of the crime.

The police followed up with a felony warrant, so they broke the door down and he had something in his hand that looked like a weapon. Bang

He set it in motion by beating and robbing someone.

If procedure was followed there is no crime here.

[Katzenjammer]

19. Nice of you to try him and convict him in a single post. Saves time, I suppose.

And since he's now conveniently dead, there won't be any appeals.

[Pavulon]

28. In the grand scheme of things

the fact that he is dead is inconvenient. It is inconvenient to him, his family, the person who shot him, and me. As a taxpayer I have to pay for the investigation in to his death.

It would be much simpler if he was alive and able to pay his victim a settlement in civil court and serve his rich boys justice probation.

So no the fact that he probably assaulted and robbed someone is not justification for shooting him at arrest. Never suggested that.

By the way he is white, and this happened in a county with minimal crime. This is not "normal" here.

[Lance_Boyle]

62. Think again.

His stepdad is a wealthy attorney in the Triangle area. This case will not disappear anytime soon.

[genieroze]

169. I don't know about that.

Ever see what one of those suckers are going for on Ebay?

[One_Life_To_Give]

6. Since his dad is a prominent area attorney

This probably won't be swept under the rug.

[Judi Lynn]

7. Police shoot, kill teen Playstation robbery suspect

Police shoot, kill teen Playstation robbery suspect
POSTED: 1:39 p.m. EST, December 4, 2006

WILMINGTON, South Carolina (AP) -- A teenager accused of robbing a student of two new Playstation 3s on the day the popular game consoles were introduced was shot to death by police sent to arrest him.

Peyton Strickland, 18, was killed Friday at a house he shared with three roommates, New Hanover County Sheriff Sid Causey said.

"If this boy would've come to the door, opened the door, we probably wouldn't be talking," the sheriff said Sunday.

Roommate Mike Rhoton said Strickland was unarmed, but may have been holding a video game controller when he went to the door as it was bashed in by officers.
(snip/...)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/04/teen.shot.ap/index.html

[karlrschneider]

8. Dead for six hundred bucks.

sheesh...

[heliarc]

27. More like $6100

Last bid I saw on Ebay was for that much. That may have changed by now, but that was the going price on the first day of sales.

[dysfunctional press]

40. ebay bids don't necessarily mean a sale at that price.

nt

[heliarc]

139. That's true

but the bid is a legally binding contract at Ebay. Enforceable action can demand the amount or penalties if someone bids.

[dysfunctional press]

153. that's what they try to tell you- but it's not true.

they would never be able to force you to honor a winning bid- it's just intimidation talk for the weak-minded.

[heliarc]

158. So encouraging that there are DUer's who don't respect laws

or communities on the internet -Sarcasm

[truthisfreedom]

9. he had his game, they had theirs.

the game of playing cops who shoot kids.

[Irreverend IX]

51. Oh, this is golden.

"Roommate Mike Rhoton said Strickland was unarmed, but may have been holding a video game controller when he went to the door as it was bashed in by officers."

That's an excuse for the ages. "I could have sworn it was an Uzi, your honor!" The kid was a scumbag, no doubt about it, but I fear him a lot less than I do the uniformed psychos who killed him.

[Pavulon]

65. Be afraid in wilmington, very afraid

this is a small college town. I can not remember the last police shooting there. They arrest hundreds of people a year without incident. Including many friends of mine ranging from dwi to felony drug charges.

If he had a black item in his hand and refused to drop it during a felony warrant it is possible he was shot by accident.

The only reason this is news is "ps3". If he had been shot holding a game controller after beating and robbing someone's drugs/stereo/car this would never get coverage.

No social angle. middle class white kid, in white college town, shot by police.

[NickB79]

149. Having held PS3 controllers and small pistols

I can say that the PS3 controller is actually as large, if not larger, than some "pocket pistols" out there today. Coupled with the fact it is black and has a shape that could make it look like it has a pistol grip at a glance, and you could easily mistake a PS3 controller for a small gun.

[Pavulon]

11. The dead guy was charged with Assault with a deadly weapon,

armed robbery. The police used a felony entry. He did not shoplift it, he beat someone and took it from them. A 2 on one beating is justification for use of deadly force at the time. A very serious crime. Meaning the person they "ganged" on could have shot both of them dead at the crime scene.

They had a warrant, they had the right to enter his house.

They will investigate to see if procedure was followed. If he moved towards the officers with something in his hand that looked like a weapon they will be cleared.

If procedure was followed there will be no charges. The fact that he is white and comes from a rich family should not make a difference.

[zreosumgame]

109. you keep on convicting him

and then claim the police are all sunny and golden-haired boys. Sounds to me like you are involved someway in this. Otherwise why all the agitation and insiting on him already being guilty?

[Pavulon]

116. If by involved you mean read the papers and

know Wilmington well yes. Other than that no. All i have said during this thread is that it warrants review. The police do not shoot people routinely in Wilmington. This is a rare thing.

I have family there and visit enough to know this is not a case of police execution.

I have made no insistence on his guilt or innocence only on the nature of the charge, a felony warrant is different than a misdemeanor warrant. I live closer to Durham than to Wilmington.

[Union Thug]

26. The whole situation is a tragedy...

People beating the shit out of others for a fucking game console. Cops blowing the shit out of people in response.

What a great country we live in.

[boobooday]

160. You said it all. n/t

[closeupready]

34. I don't feel too sorry for the guy, frankly.

No, it wasn't a punishment that fit the crime, but to some extent, it was good luck that the PS3 owner didn't die or wasn't permanently injured (which sometimes you can't even confirm until much later on). If there had been more at stake, who knows where the alleged thief would have stopped. These people are often career criminals, and law enforcement officers must assume the worst.

Sorry if that sounds harsh - I was mugged and robbed myself, so I know how traumatizing it can be, above and beyond the actual attack.

EDIT: all just my opinion if the facts are as I am reading them, which they may not be.

[wuushew]

44. No one has mentioned the murder of his dog by the police

fully clothed and uniformed police are not in danger of being mauled to death by most dogs. A human is much more cable of killing a canine than vice versa. Subduing, incapacitating or otherwise dealing with a protective pet should always be attempted before using deadly force.


Shame on these murderers.

[closeupready]

47. It was a German shepherd, which is a big dog and

can be aggressive. They may not have had protective gear, not if they didn't know he had a dog.

This whole thing is sad, from beginning to end.

[superconnected]

50. I'll suspend judgement until I know the whole story.

[TheMadMonk]

52. Fucking amazing.

Tasering an 11 year old in the very process of attempting to maim/kill as classmate is pure evil.

But a guy attempting to stand up for what he thought were his legal rights deserves to die.

My understanding from US cop shows (yeah I know) is that to arrest a bloke without a warrant in hand, the cops have to get him to step outside his house, and that they can not enter his home unless they believe a crime to be actually in progress at the time they enter.

I would presume this bloke had the same idea, and the cops killed him for his mistake and folks here are cheering them on.


I'm beginning to believe that there aren't enough good people left in the United States for it to be worth saving.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

55. Did you see the thread...

about the guy who shot the child for throwing eggs at his SUV?

[TheMadMonk]

56. No. I presume the kid deserved that too?

Bullets good. Electricity bad. Ludd must be splooging all over the lid of his coffin.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. Apparently.

Never mess with a man's car. Killing somebody else's kid is, apparently, hunky dory.

[closeupready]

58. What do you mean?

I don't think anyone is cheering that someone died.

[NickB79]

150. According to the report, they had a warrant

But the man who was shot refused to open the door to go outside. An entry team rammed down the door, and when police entered he had a PS3 controller in his hand. If you have never handled one, it is as large as many small "pocket pistols", otherwise known as Saturday Night Specials, and is black. They thought it was a gun, and they shot him.

[Llewlladdwr]

163. You would be incorrect sir...

If a warrant for your arrest has been issued that's all the authorization the police need to enter your residence. The actual paper need not be present.

[MichaelHarris]

57. If he's guilty

one less piece of trash on the street, if he didn't steal it then he shoulda opened the door.

[wuushew]

61. I see you are not a fan of the Constitution

Citizens are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. A government that justifies home invasion looking for evidence of any non-particular crime is tyrannical. For all we know the individual was innocent of stealing a PS3 but was growing weed or some such non-crime.

Big screw up by the police for not having a copy of the warrant. Why were shots fired?

[MichaelHarris]

67. Well

from what I read they did have a warrant. I'm a fan of the Constitution I also don't like petty criminals. Look we all have to wait for the facts but lets say for a moment this kid is guilty. If guilty he had so little regard for anything decent that he would beat a guy with a club for a damn game. I won't waste my time defending trash like that. To me it's like the Waco thing, if you got nothing to hide open the God damned door. It's all real simple for me.

[wuushew]

71. His roommate claims otherwise

His roommate Mike Rhoton said that authorities mentioned a search warrant, but they didn’t provide a copy.

Cops need to calm down and execute searches properly. Get and present lawful warrants, take the welfare of animals into consideration and generally be more civic.

Cops being assholes just gets people killed.

[MichaelHarris]

74. that's why

we like to wait for the facts before we side with punk kids who beat people up for hunks of plastic. My common sense tells me there is no way those cops busted in a door without a warrant, not all cops are bad.

Sure they may find excessive force was used but they didn't go there to kill a kid. Now before you accuse me assuming this kid is guilty I'll agree with you, I'm assuming. I'm letting my common sense work in this instance.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

79. "I'm assuming... this kid is guilty."

Silly me, I thought it was supposed to be the presumption of innocence before proven guilty.

[Ms. Clio]

120. apparently, only the police are presumed innocent in this case n/t

[Llewlladdwr]

164. Innocent until proven guilty only applies in a courtroom.

Private citizens not on a jury are free to form whatever opinions on the matter they wish.

[Richard Steele]

83. Only if the phrase "common sense" now means "cops are always correct".

But you've ADMITTED that already, now haven't you?

QUOTE:"before you accuse me assuming this kid is guilty
I'll agree with you, I'm assuming."

What IDIOTS wrote that time-consuming "Bill of Rights", huh?
We've wasted MILLIONS of dollars on a COURT SYSTEM for so many
years, and we could have SAVED every penny if we had just let
every cop ASSUME what you do.

Why are Cops even wasting time walking the streets, when it's
so easy to ASSUME things while sitting at home in front of the PC?

Clearly, your amazing talents are being WASTED in your current
position, Mr. Harris.

[MichaelHarris]

111. Hey

thanks for noticing, I am pretty talented.

[Richard Steele]

113. Yeah, you're a regular legend in your own mind.

You have a blessed day now, sweetie.

[Zhade]

155. Infuckingdeed.

Stunning to see such wanton disregard for our rights thrown out there as if it's excusable.

Some people still worship authority, even when it comes out that cops routinely frame people by planting things in their cars.

Unbelievable. Such naivete.

[fujiyama]

114. Careful with that last comment:

"if you got nothing to hide open the God damned door. It's all real simple for me."

That's the same reasoning that justifies illegal wiretaps and leads to excess government power in general. We have laws to guard against such power and for good reason. It's unclear whether the police had a warrant or not and that is very problematic, but more so is the shooting of the suspect.

In this case, it's just a matter of convenience that the "right" person was shot. It could just as well have been a case of mistaken identity and someone uninvolved could have ended up dead. There is no doubt that anyone beating a man up to steal something is scum, and deserves a stiff punishment for the crime. But that penalty is for the courts to decide. Even scum have rights in this country.

It's difficult to tell whether he appeared to be armed at the moment and whether there was any resisting from the suspect. Hopefully the investigation will clear this up.

[MichaelHarris]

115. I agree with you

it's a fine line between wire tapping that amounts to trolling for information and an actual arrest warrant. I can see where a good debate can be had on the two. My only defense would be that wire-tapping is trolling for evidence where the warrant was issued after some kind of evidence went before a judge.

I didn't respond to the posts below accusing me of supporting wire taps, those were just too defensive. Your post was much more constructive. I could very well be wrong but I see illegal wiretaps as evidence gathering trying to prove a case, I don't support that. An arrest warrant, like the one served in Waco and at this kid's house was based on evidence we hope was gained legally and issued by a judge that reviewed that evidence.

[fujiyama]

117. I have no real problem

with the police busting open the door of a suspect accused of assault and robbery. But as this is a system of laws, they need the warrant (unless it's some sort of urgent situation with an armed suspect where I'm pretty sure exceptions are made).

The police in this case are just "lucky" I suppose that they shot the suspect (assuming he is guilty), rather than someone else. This situation could have been even more disastrous and tragic. My guess is either protocol was not followed or there was some sort of altercation leading to an officer feeling threatened. If the suspect was not armed this incident is quite troubling though and I could see the officers facing a penalty. It's tough to say from news reports though.

[karlrschneider]

121. Arrest warrants aren't the same as search warrants.

If a cop comes to your house to search it, he damn well better have a warrant "fair on its face." And you have every right to inspect it before you consent (which I wouldn't even give until I had the chance to attempt to verify its authenticity.)

Arrest warrants are different: peace officers aren't -required- to produce it (or a copy even) to
carry them out. Thousands of people are arrested every day after a routine traffic stop when the
existence of outstanding warrants is verified... by radio, computer, etc.

Now, I'm not passing judgment of whether this is a good or a bad thing, just saying it has been so for
many decades. Obviously if the warrant does NOT exist, (a situation I find difficult to believe) the
cops are extremely culpable. And I also know (from personal experience) that there are too many 'trigger happy' cops with insufficient training or having mentalities that are incompatible with
good police work out there. Given the pay they get, it shouldn't really surprise anyone.

Clearly, the arrest attempt went horribly wrong, I don't think any of us would say otherwise, but the
details are as yet obscure and hopefully the state or even federal Bureaus of Investigation will get to the bottom of it.

[Ms. Clio]

132. I guess my question, is, though, is it routine to execute an arrest warrant by knocking down

someone's front door? This is not a traffic stop arrest.

Thanks for the info.

[karlrschneider]

134. It isn't routine to the point of being more frequent than not, I suppose.

If the cops had reason to believe the person named in the warrant was inside, it's legal for them to
bust in. Based on what I've read about this particular residence, it's not a stretch for me to imagine there could have been loud music or other sounds coming from within. Maybe Strickland didn't hear them
knocking...or ignored it, I don't know the particulars. Or maybe the cops actually did go batshit nuts, that's not impossible either.

Please understand that I'm very concerned that the cops used poor judgment, it surely seems to me...however they could been operating in a completely legal manner. And I submit that 'legal' doesn't necessarily or even usually mean 'good'. The fact there's a dead kid appears to demonstrate my observation. From 1000 miles away I have no way to determine what actually happened. Here is one
-possibility-:

They knocked on the door, the kids didn't hear it but the dog did and ran to the door barking and growling - cops hear this and recognize the sounds of a large dog inside and maybe other music/noise/sounds. (German Shepherds are the common K-9s of choice and most cops are familiar with their behavior and capability)

Cops assume (correctly or not) the dog has been 'sic'd' on them and proceed to bash the door, first
thing they see is the dog and shoot him first (none of the reports has said who was shot first, AFAICT)
the kid comes barging out of the other room holding something in his hand (game controller?...that COULD look like a weapon at first glance)? so he gets shot too, maybe by 2 or 3 cops.

Of course I'm just proposing some speculation on what have MIGHT taken place. The awful truth is that we may never really know. It's a horrific and sad situation all around in any case.

[Ms. Clio]

136. okay, thanks

and certainly what you propose sounds plausible, although that's not how the witness describes the scene, at least from what I've read. No doubt more details will emerge later, but overall it is just sounding a little hinky to me right now.

[TX-RAT]

146. Felony

If it's a felony arrest and the suspect may be armed and dangerous, Yes.

[Ms. Clio]

152. I see

thanks for the info.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MichaelHarris]

68. here ya go

I just answered your Fascist response above.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

69. I guess that was the Double Jeopardy answer.

[MichaelHarris]

72. I have no idea

I never understood why some people think law enforcement is always wrong when something likes this happens. There's so many scenarios here that could have happened, the police may have thought the controller was a gun, he may have had the controller that looks like a gun, a ton of things could have gone wrong.

What the men going through the door knew for a fact was this boy was accused of beating a guy with a club for something as simple as a game. If someone would use deadly force for a piece of plastic and wires the police had no idea what he would do to defend his freedom.

We always have a group of the left who think the police are fascists, yes they make mistakes, yes there are corrupt ones but there is no way they gathered at that door to kill that kid. Why do we rush to condemn them, why can't we wait for their story? I can say this with all certainty, if that kid hadn't stole a PSP3 using deadly force to get it he would be alive. We can also say with 100% certainty, his victim who did what the right thing by waiting in line for the game didn't deserve to be beat up by petty criminals.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

73. Michael, in a non-fascist, democratic society...

authority is constantly questioned.

"I can say this with all certainty, if that kid hadn't stole a PSP3 using deadly force to get it he would be alive."

It's comments like that which are the reason you've got people calling you a fascist. You've got no idea if this person did it or not.

[MichaelHarris]

76. and

we have no idea if the cops acted in self defense. The only reason I added to this thread was to somehow stop the "All Cops are bad" thing.

If you pin me down and allow me to use my common sense I'll say straight up this kid did it. Very few innocent people get their door kicked down. The police do at least a little leg work before they bust doors.

What it boils down to in a thread like this is a brawl between two groups of people, the side who thinks cops only want to kill, plant evidence, and close cases and the side who wants a little law and order.

I know I'm wrong assuming this kid's guilt but am I any different than the people here assuming the cops went on a killing spree? I've seen some say here a kid shouldn't be killed for just stealing a PS3. He didn't get killed for "just stealing a PS3" He got killed for whatever actions he took when he heard a knock on the door after being suspected of a violent crime.

His defense should have begun answering the door, not for whatever caused the police to kick it down. He would be alive if he had answered the door.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

78. "The only reason I added to this thread..."

"was to somehow stop the 'All Cops are bad' thing."

Well, since you just made up this "All Cops are bad" thing I'm going to have to disbelieve you.

[MichaelHarris]

80. hahahahahahaha

OK. Wanna accuse me of stuff like the dicksteele guy did also? It may make you feel better.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

82. Accuse you?

Why, Michael, I already assumed you were guilty.

[MichaelHarris]

85. thanks

[karlrschneider]

81. Well, Strickland was hardly an angel. Some more history:

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/517638.html

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

84. My goodness. Rap music.

The horror.

[MichaelHarris]

86. you know what's cool?

You saw rap music and completely missed the part where cops had been to the house before and that he had broken another kids jaw. That strikes me as odd.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

88. No, I saw it.

It's also completely irrelevant.

[MichaelHarris]

90. I see your point

this kids history of violence is irrelevant for the cops knocking at the door. Now it all makes perfect sense.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

91. alledged history of violence.

Funny how you missed the "trial is pending" part.

[TheMadMonk]

140. You know what's cooler?

And you managed to completely miss the part where the article says the cops came to search for missing PS3's. For this they do need a warrant.

But let's be charitable to the cops. Let's assume the paper got that wrong, and they were there to arrest him.

The reported accounts, have Strickland answering the door, possibly being a bit panicky when it turns out to be the cops. His dad's a lawyer, and he's been in a bit of trouble before, so he's probably got a fairish (though possibly incomplete) idea of what his rights are and what the cops responsibilities are in that situation. So he demands to see a warrant and when they can't deliver, refuses to step outside where they can arrest him sans warrant.

(Can someone tell me if the cops in Wilmington can enter a person's home to enforce an arrest warrant sitting on a desk somewhere and not physically in their hand?)

Next words are exchanged and things get heated. (It's quite possibily about here that the dog starts up.) The cops bust the door down and a few seconds later Strickland and his dog are dead.

Alternatively, the cops busted the door down and Strickland gave them a mouthful. (Again, this is the likely point for the dog to enter the fray.)


Most of the above is in the reported accounts and for the purpose of the exercise I will assume them to be a close facsimile of the truth, with some speculation based upon my admittedly limited knowledge of the law in the US.

So why the fuck didn't the cops just wait for that warrant? Strickland wasn't going anywhere and sending a PS3 (which they may or may not have been entitled to look for) around the S-bend is not exactly easy, if at all possible.


My turn to assume. It was getting close to shift change and the cops were pissed at being mouthed off at by a punk kid. The let their emotions get the better of them and acted excessively. Strickland's dog doesn't like this invasion of its territory and let's the cops know it in no uncertain terms.

The cops are now faced with a threat which is pretty much of their own making and use their guns. Killing the dog and Strickland.


If my speculation is even remotely close to the truth of the matter, those cops should have the book thrown at them.

Further, no matter how "in the right" they were, unless there was a clear and present danger, they still deserve to have their arses royally reamed. Their actions, leading up to the shooting were not necessary, even if they were permissible.

[TX-RAT]

147. Hmmm

The original link said they had come to arrest him. They may well have been a warrant for his arrest and a warrant to search the property. In which case he would have been taken into custody first, then shown the warrant for a search of property's. They do not have to have the warrant in hand to make an arrest. They do need warrant in hand to search property's.

[karlrschneider]

148. Correct. I mentioned this in my post # 121...

ks

[Pavulon]

87. I think he means the assault w injury

breaking someones jaw takes some effort.

[Pavulon]

92. A note, most golf games

have a little piece of plastic that could be mistaken for a gun. The "club" in the wrong light could look like a handgun

[Solon]

98. Kinda like that old lady who got shot and killed in I think it was Atlanta...

She was so OBVIOUSLY guilty, yeah, sure. :sarcasm:

Look, the burden of proof is on the COPS period, the reason is simple, they are vested with power by the state, and should be held accountable in all cases where said power is used.

[Pavulon]

99. Correct, the SBI

will investigate the shooting. They are independent and have a history here of no tolerance for cooked law enforcement.

[Richard Steele]

75. And I now realize that your sigline is a TRIBUTE.

Silly me, I had assumed it was a criticism.

[MichaelHarris]

77. man o man

that's original what are you going to accuse me of next? Hey here's a tip, the police ring your doorbell refuse to answer it and do all kind of wacky things with your hands.

[fleabert]

101. roomate stated he was going to the door when they busted it down

and shot him and his dog dead.

what if he had on headphones and didn't hear the door at first? Roomates yell at you to open the door because the cops are yelling your name, you scramble for the door- freaked out- the dog is barking at all the commotion- you don't even put down the game controller...a moment later you are dead.

What if- IF - this guy didn't do it? Isn't that what a trial is for? I am not comfortable with the cops playing judge jury and executioners...

the supposition of innocent until proven guilty supercedes anything else supposed about this incident.

[Pavulon]

104. How many felony arrests are conducted

and how many result in shootings? Come on, the police do not just draw straws and decide to shoot people at random.

They are all presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Police and the person who was shot.

[fleabert]

135. according to what I have read, I am at the conclusion that it appears

excessive force was used. And- before you get your underwear into more of a twist about this, I was responding to a post that said we are all better if the guy was guilty and now he's dead- called him 'trash' if I remember correctly

I could be wrong- but I have a feeling if the eyewitness accounts bear true, excessive force will be found to have been excercised. I am willing to say that the police may have very well felt their lives were threatened by the person and the dog- but it is going to take a lot to convince me they were warranted in killing them both in response.

[Pavulon]

137. Not my post

I did not call him anything. I have stated numerous times that a full inquiry will be done. I also said that this is a small town, and that police shootings are very rare.

It is a college town so the police are used to interacting with, and arresting students. This usually happens without incident. I can not remember a case like this in my life. Not that there was not one.

I have just put ideas out on the table. I have not judged the man guilty only stated they served a felony warrant for a person accused of a violent crime. I believe until an SBI inquiry is complete there is no conclusion that can be supported by the facts out now.

If excessive force was used I would expect people to be held accountable.

[fleabert]

138. you responded to my post in a bit of an uproar,

and I hadn't responded to you. My op was directed at the other person, not you. that's why I don't get why you were so upset with what I said.

I have read most of what you have posted, and I think it would do you well to cool off a bit and read this later with some perspective. Most of what I have taken from your posts is that it isn't excessive to kill a person and their dog if they are SUSPECTED of committing a violent crime. Shoot to kill isn't what police are trained to do except in exceptional situations. A shot to the leg would have taken him out just fine.

[Richard Steele]

102. Wow, you're spinning so fast even your STRAWMAN is confused.

Weren't we discussing a shooting victim who ANSWERED the door?
Oh, why...yes we were.

And since when has "doing all kind of wacky things with your hands"
been valid legal grounds for SHOOTING an unarmed man in his home?

Please be a dear and cite the actual U.S. LAW that says that's OK, would you?

[Pavulon]

106. Fail to follow instructions and move your hands

to you belt at your next traffic stop. If you are not shot you will be very lucky..

The point is that no one knows what happened yet. The police will have their statement and so will the roommate.

If the police serve a felony warrant at your home you would be wise to comply with instructions and not answer you door with your German shepherd and a chunk of plastic that looks like a pistol.

Now a full investigation is warranted and will be carried out by the SBI.

[MichaelHarris]

110. I give up

you can't reason with these people, in their eyes all cops want to shoot someone they're just looking for reasons. I happen to also feel sorry for the cops that shot the guns, they are going through some heavy soul searching right about now. I'm just going to let these people wallow in misery for the thief while I show my compassion for those that put their lives on the line trying to get trash like this off the street.

I wonder what will happen to the compassion when we find out this kid was guilty? Will they still be trying to defend him? Will they ever have any emotion for the cops who were put into a position to take a life during the holidays?

Lets hope there's an investigation, if the cops did wrong I'll be the first wanting them behind bars. If I'm wrong I'll say so, I don't think I am I truly believe this kid was guilty.

Watch um now call me a fascist (again) hell they may even go the freeper route.

[superconnected]

124. Yep, you're right.

Meanwhile the front of seattle komo tv news right now: http://www.komotv.com/

"The man who shot and killed King County Deputy Steve Cox early Saturday morning is suspected of killing another man just four hours earlier, officials said Monday. He is also a convicted felon who had been arrested at least 17 times and sent to jail or prison nine times. More... http://www.komotv.com/news/4818156.html



2nd cop killed here in a month. This one was shot in the head. The last one was hit by a stolen car.

[fleabert]

156. I am always going to err on the side of innocent until proven guilty

and I am always going to fight against the death penalty that these cops handed out without an arrest, trial, judge, or jur. I fight against a state sanctioned death penalty too.

If he did it, he should have been arrested, tried, and convicted. Not shot dead with his dog because he took too long to answer the door.

I sure hope that if I am ever served a warrant I am not taking a shit when they come knocking.

[Richard Steele]

118. And that's a GOOD thing in your opinion? Or does it just make you feel big to say it?

Just FYI, the last time I was pulled over for a traffic offense
was the summer of 1994.
I was wearing shorts and a vest, and when I pulled my wallet
out of my inside vest pocket, the nice officer who had pulled me
over observed the fact that my hand brushed against the
Glock Model 19 I was carrying in a shoulder holster.

Crazy bastard didn't shoot me 10 times through the car door,
can you believe that shit?
No, he ASKED me if that was a weapon he had seen, and actually
WAITED to hear my response to his question!!!!

And then he looked at my "concealed carry" permit next to my DL,
and we spent a minute discussing the relative merits of my Glock
compared to the S&W his Dept. mandated that he carry, while we
waited for his cruiser-computer to run my license info.
Then he gave me my ticket, and told me to watch my speed and have a good day.

Gee, what if THAT cop had gone to someone's door who "moved their hands"
while their big dog barked inside the house, huh?

Betcha that "someone" would still be alive right now.
Betcha a shiney new NICKEL.

[Pavulon]

123. You are fucking lucky, buy lotto for me

When I have been pulled over and happen to be carrying concealed the FIRST thing I do is tell the officer I am legally concealing a weapon. Right off the bat. That is mentioned in the course and is common sense.

I dont go moving my hands around until he understands that it is there.

I have never had a police officer give a shit.

Point is no one knows the circumstances involved in that house.

Bet you a shiny nickel if that officer had put two rounds in your chest and then said you did not disclose a weapon and he thought you were going for it he would be on the job now and/or collecting his pension.

[fleabert]

100. unfucking believable.

and if you aren't doing anything wrong then you shouldn't worry about warrentless wiretapping, right?

[humbled_opinion]

59. Sickening this is what terror fear mongering gets us. n/t

[slackmaster]

103. Sounds like excessive force by the police, but not enough information

To make a full judgement here.

I would also note that any time one gets into an interaction with police as a suspect, that carries a risk of something bad like this happening. If you stay out of trouble, you are very unlikely to be shot by police.

[Blue_Tires]

133. a lot of holes in this story

the cops involved will have tough questions to answer at the admin hearing....did they really shoot an unarmed person six times?

i'd like to know how many police were involved, and how many shots were fired (and how many cops fired)

[Katzenjammer]

141. Where were their tazers? That's what I'd like to know.

I was under the impression that tazers were supplied for just such occasions as this, where the person is a suspected violent felon, but is not a suspected killer. I.e. not someone who "deserves" to be shot dead on the spot.

Where were their tazers?

[closeupready]

143. That's a good point.

eom

[Tight_rope]

142. One man beaten and another shot to death over a FUCKING GAME!

I give up on this country...for it has surely gone to HELL.

[slackmaster]

151. The beating was indeed over the game

The shooting, if police are to be believed, was for something more along the lines of resisting arrest.

[Canuckistanian]

144. Sony must be so proud of the free publicity

This is what happens, assholes, when you deliberately undersource your new product to promote the "buzz".

Of course, it doesn't help that people fall for this crap every time.

[Katzenjammer]

154. "Of course, it doesn't help that people fall for this crap every time."

Which is, when you think about it really, an extremely good argument for dumping capitalism.

[NuttyFluffers]

157. i still support tranq guns and mancatchers to replace police arsenal

if you really, really, *really* need a gun, then you can go through the necessary channels and get a well trained swat team along with judicial warrants. other than that i'm really not seeing how replacing all police weapons down to tranquilizer guns and mancatchers is bad. oh and batons and 'cuffs, too. we got cell phones, cameras, helicopters, etc. with our rapid communication and transportation there's more than enough opportunity to deal with most civilian issues.

[Miss Chybil]

161. There's an old saying...

"Don't start no shit, there won't be none."

Was this shooting unjustified? I don't know. I wasn't there and I don't really rely on police investigations of themselves, BUT if the dead guy really did beat and rob somebody... well, if he hadn't, he probably wouldn't be dead now.

Whatever happened, it's a bad deal all around.

[Hippo_Tron]

168. In a civilized society cops don't walk into alleged criminals' houses and blow their brains out

The beauty of our justice system is that even thugs like this kid get a fair trial and a fair sentence. I'm pretty sure that the police despose of petty criminals in this manner in places like Iran.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

165. Cop charged with 2nd degree murder.

Sorry mods, thought this thread was alread archived.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16160104/

[Hippo_Tron]

166. In a civilized society thugs like this kid are entitled to a trial and a fair sentence

I frankly don't want to live in a country where the police bang down the door and blow your brains out because you'e committed crime even if some people say that you deserve it.

[leftofthedial]

167. isn't that two dead now in the great PS3 wars

of 2006?