Thursday, February 05, 2009
Talkin' bout the... (pt 2)
T-P:A 22-year-old man shot by New Orleans police on New Year's Day was struck nine times by bullets to the back of his body, according to an autopsy by the Orleans Parish coroner's office.
In all, the autopsy shows that Adolph Grimes III was wounded 14 times by gunshots, including three graze wounds and a tangential wound to the upper left forehead.
Exactly where and how many times Grimes was hit was a matter of dispute in the days after the shooting, with Orleans Parish Coroner Frank Minyard describing 12 wounds to Grimes' back and legs. NOPD Superintendent Warren Riley countered that characterization, saying he believed Grimes was hit in the front, on the side under the arm and "near the back."
The autopsy protocol by Dr. Samantha Huber, a pathologist with the coroner's office, shows nine gunshot entry wounds in the back of Grimes' body, with some bullets also exiting the body. There were also two graze wounds to what could be described as the back of Grimes' arms.
WDSU:Grimes' family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the New Orleans Police Department on Tuesday. Police Superintendent Warren Riley told WDSU he will not comment on the case.
Then why did he dispute the coroner's report in the first place?
Riley has said the officers were in a group -- three women were acting as holdup decoys and six men were covering them -- when a shooting was reported at a club in that area.
He said the officers saw a black car leaving the club's neighborhood, and Grimes was in a black car parked about four blocks from the club.
There's a troubling lack of information about this case. I hesitate to comment on it. For example, I don't know what a "holdup decoy" is.
And where the hell is the ballistic test on Grimes' firearm? But what I do know seems extremely disturbing and suspicious.
One more nugget from the
T-P:Riley has described the incident as a "gun battle" started by Grimes as unmarked vehicles approached him in his car on Gov. Nicholls Street. Police have said Grimes fired the first shot at the officers, who were wearing street clothes. Seven officers returned fire, police said.
I mean, I can
imagine a scenario where Grimes perhaps thought he was about to get jacked by people (women?) who he didn't know were plainclothes police, and he stupidly took a shot at them and they returned fire hitting him once in the front of the body, and he fled from his car and the police all fired at the same time, inflicting all the fatal wounds on Grimes' back and head.
Yeah, maybeeee.
But if that's the case, do the police believe that they got their man? Hell, if Grimes was itchin' for gunplay, then perhaps he was crazy enough to drive down to the club 4 blocks away earlier that night and take a shot at someone else.
Yeah, maybeeeeee.
But under that scenario, you basically have to believe that Grimes-- an employed father with no criminal record and a registered gun owner-- drove in from Tejas to celebrate New Year's with family and friends, and while waiting in the car for his cousin to arrive decided, for reasons unknown, to take the first shot at some people on the street.
Read the family's complaint of the NOPD's "tortuous actions" and public relaions cover up
here. Try not to vomit when you read about the NOPD cuffing Grimes and saying they "apprehended" the suspect as he was lying dead on the sidewalk.
If that ballistics test shows that Grimes hadn't discharged his firearm... all hell is going to break loose.
As it should.
Labels: crime
10 comments
DiggIt!
Del.icio.us
10 Comments:
It was my understanding when the story first broke that the family had conceded that Grimes' gun had been fired by a cousin, into the ground, at midnight. Also, what happened to the reports of an outward pointing bullet hole in Grimes' back windshield? Now, no GSR on Grimes' hand, all hell should probably break loose (assuming it's not possible to fire a gun and not get GSR on you and your surroundings).
Further, it actually *is* arguably proper procedure to handcuff a wounded suspect who has already taken a shot at police. They don't want to take a chance that he's not as bad off as he looks and is able to grab a gun (far fetched as it may sound, it's not totally unheard of).
Even assuming, arguendo, that happened. Allegations in a lawsuit do not facts make.
From what I'm seeing, this doesn't look like a murder. Horrendous, sloppy police procedure that should get all of the shooters fired and/or relegated to stable duty? Yes. Murder? Probably not. After they had located the car, all they had to do was call in a marked unit to make the initial encounter, and this would likely not have happened.
My point is that of all the incidents of NOPD abuse, this probably isn't the one to get worked up over. There is plenty far more egregious, ans systemic, misconduct to look at. Just like with armed robberies relative to felony murders, there are a lot of cases of abuse that don't result in deaths.
I also reserve the right to totally change my opinion as the details of the FBI's investigation emerge. That's right, I'm a hedger.
This is extraordinarily disturbing. That's all I can really say about it. It just doesn't seem legit.
Does the NOPD even have a credible Internal Affairs department???
"Does the NOPD even have a credible Internal Affairs department???"
Not from what I've seen.
I'm not a coroner but I think you can spot wounds on the back of a dead body just by looking. There isn't really anything to dispute. You either accept the coroner's report (which probably includes photos) or you call the coroner a liar or incompetent. It's not a he said/she said scenario. You can check the corpse and declare a winner.
There really is just enough info here to fit everyone's prejudices.
I tend to think that when reacting to a potentially life threatening situation, the police don't stop to compare notes and decide which one is going to do the shooting. I would honestly be more worried if only one had fired.
I spoke with a forensic pathologist about this case and she reminded me that the force of one bullet can twist the body 180 degrees, leaving the remaining bullets to enter through the rear, without insinuating that the guy was "shot in the back."
I still think the cops did this guy dirty, but there is science to think about. Not like I trust the NOPD to do clean science or anything.
I don't want to take the NOPD's side on this because, at best, the whole thing is entirely f***ed-up. But I want to scream "Are you stupid, or just f***ing intellectually dishonest?" when I hear people make such a big deal out of shots to the back or side. Or, shots fired "when his back was turned," as Jarvis DeBerry wrote in what started out as a good column before he had to ruin it with his chronic need to flaunt his righteousness. It's almost impossible to reconcile shots to the back with claims of self-defense, but it's not at all difficult to reconcile shots to the back or side with claims that the shots were justified. Hasn't anybody in N.O. ever seen The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence? I'm not being facetious with the movie reference, the claim isn't that all the shots were in self-defense, the claim is that the shots were justifiable. There's also what alli said to consider.
We know that seven of nine officers present fired shots and fourteen shots were fired. Once the first shot was fired, wouldn't all the police officers fire on the assumption that an officer was under fire? All we can infer is that 5 or 6 of the officers who fired were not facing Grimes. I'm curious about how quickly statements were taken from the two who didn't fire.
Unless it can be shown that the police acted maliciously or that Grimes fired at the police, this is a case where I don't know how justice can be done. Even if grimes fired, it wouldn't necessarily absolve the police of all responsibility. I'm guessing that one of the police officers got nervous and fired and the rest reacted as if an officer were under fire. If something like that happened, it's certainly not justice for Grimes' family for nobody to be punished. Since life isn't a CSI episode, we'll probably never know who fired the first shot. It would strike me as unfair to at least six people to charge all seven, even with manslaughter. Less unfair than events were to Grimes, but still unfair.
BTW, I wasn't trying to imply anything about either your cognitive capabilities or your intellectual integrity, since you didn't build your case on a scream of "shots to the back."
I've always thought holdup decoys would be a good idea in relatively small areas that have a seen a spike in armed robberies and the victims fit easily mimicked profiles. It would be easy to dress police officers in black-and-whites (or even black pants and shoes with a backpack, or just rubber soled black shoes and a backpack) and have them walk in and around the French Quarter. Young patrolmen could easily walk around the university area on weekend. It would probably be a waste of resources to have officers dress well and try to followed home from Langenstein's or the Uptown Rouse's. I always thought we only had undercover vice cops. I suspect the women officers were posing as prostitutes and Riley tidied up the story.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Warren Riley come up through IA?
El Stevo:
"Does the NOPD even have a credible Internal Affairs department???"
Y'know, if a man hadn't just been killed in cold blood, I'd be doing the "BWUAAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!" shit all over this place. But it's too fucking tragic to be funny.
Some other time, I'll educate you about MY dealings with the "Public Integrity" department of NOPD *and* the entire command staff of the 2nd District. You might not believe it, but I've still got the documentation. Suffice it to say that, like the State Medical Licensing Board, the "Public Integrity" division exists only to cover the asses of and the crimes committed BY the NOPD.
Y'know how to tell when cops* are lying?
Their lips are moving.
*(excusing the .5% who aren't.)
