Man shot by police is schizophrenic, mother says
Grand County driver critical after being shot by deputy following chase, crash
By Tillie Fong, Rocky Mountain News (Contact), Alan Gathright, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published October 7, 2008 at 9 a.m.
Photo by Darin McGregor
Surrounded by friends and family Dawn North, mother of the young man shot by a Grand County Sheriff's Deputy on Monday evening, talks on her cell phone after coming out of St. Anthony Central Hospital with her daughter Dawnette, 17, in Denver Tuesday Oct. 7, 2008.
Photo by Darin McGregor
Dawn North, mother of the young man shot by a Grand County Sheriff's Deputy on Monday evening, talks on her cell phone after coming out of St. Anthony Central Hospital with her daughter Dawnette, 17, in Denver Tuesday Oct. 7, 2008. Inside her son was being stabilized after being shot multiple times by a Grand County Sheriff's Deputy following a car chase that resulted in a crash and alleged confrontation.
A 23-year-old Granby man — whose mother said is schizophrenic — remained in critical condition late Tuesday after he was shot multiple times by a Grand County sheriff's deputy.
Christopher David Dalgarn was shot Monday night after he got into a fight with the deputy, who tried to pull him over for erratic driving. He remained at St. Anthony Central Hospital with gunshots to his neck, abdomen and little finger, according to Grand County Sheriff Rod Johnson. The deputy, who was not identified, was placed on administrative leave.
Dalgarn's mother, Dawn North, said doctors cautioned her that he may have paralysis because a bullet damaged his spinal cord.
Dalgarn, a working electrician, was diagnosed three years ago with drug-induced schizophrenia, his mother said. His mental illness especially can be triggered when he drinks, she said. "Unfortunately, he has no insurance and the medicine is $300 a month."
It was not known Tuesday whether alcohol or drugs were a factor in the case. Results of a toxicology test on Dalgarn won't be available for a couple of weeks.
The incident started around 7 p.m. Monday, when a resident called Grand County dispatch and reported that a possibly intoxicated driver in a black Ford Focus near Granby was swerving into oncoming traffic on US 40. A few minutes later, a Grand County sheriff's deputy near Tabernash spotted the vehicle.
But before the deputy could pull the car over, Dalgarn allegedly sped off, leading to a high speed pursuit. "The deputy said he was going about 85 mph," said Johnson. About two miles east of Tabernash, Dalgarn allegedly slammed on his brakes, and the deputy passed him. As the deputy turned his vehicle around, Dalgarn tried to pass him.
At that point, the deputy rammed his cruiser into the driver's side of Dalgarn's Ford.
After the collision, the two men apparently got out of their vehicles.
"The suspect charges the deputy and they have an altercation," said Johnson. "The deputy tries to control him, but after several attempts, the deputy shoots him in fear for his life."
Johnson said that while Dalgarn did not have a weapon, he did not have details on what happened during the fight which led to the shooting. "Whatever happened in the altercation led the deputy to fear for his life," said Johnson.
He said the deputy fired at least twice.
The confrontation has gripped the tiny town of Granby, where locals, including North, are on a first-name basis with Johnson. North even used to work for the sheriff as an animal control officer.
The mother said she had to call the sheriff's office and Johnson spoke to her briefly, saying: "There was a confrontation, and the deputy had to shoot him."
North said her son owns no weapons. "I'm just so confused," she said. "This is my son. They shot my boy."
North said David, the eldest of her three children, went out about 6:30 p.m. Monday for what should have been a 30-minute trip to Winter Park to return a movie and go to the grocery store. "He left my house completely sober," she said.
North said David's last schizophrenic episode occurred about six months ago when he began drinking after his best friend was killed on a car crash. He got agitated and the mother took him to the local clinic, where he began grappling with medical staff trying to restrain him.
He received one month's worth of medication from the clinic, which ran out quite a while ago, North said.
A check of court records showed that Dalgarn pleaded guilty to drunken driving in Grand County in 2004 and was sentenced to 96 hours of community service and two years of probation.
The deputy who shot Dalgarn did not know him, Johnson said.
On Tuesday, taking a break from her son's hospital bedside, North said, "I was just in there looking at him and I thought: 'Here's a kid with a mental illness and he was shot three times by a cop.' "
October 7, 2008
9:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
sneak this onto his iTunes while he's recuperating:
"I fought the law and the law won"
October 7, 2008
9:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
With the dangers associated with high speed chases, lethal force should be used everytime against the violators. I dont care what they run for, but they need to be stopped fast! If that means shooting the driver, so be it.
Cowboy...very funny!
October 7, 2008
9:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
sweetpea313 writes:
If he was running from the law, seems like a shot in the leg or the foot would have been more appropriate than in the throat! Wouldn't a shot in the abdomen have sufficed to bring him down? I'm not sticking up for the drunk driver, but something sounds wrong about this.
October 7, 2008
10:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
theguyoverthere writes:
This is the thing I don't like about the police philosophies of shoot first ask questions later. How many innocent people have been killed because cops thought they had weapons on them? Cops should be taught to shoot to disable, not shoot to kill.
October 7, 2008
10:11 a.m.
BroncoRick69 writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
October 7, 2008
10:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
777J writes:
Sheepherder - you're an idiot. Your misguided attitude simply gives the police license to do what ever they want (and unless you're a complete fool you understand that can be bad - see constitution). If you want to live in a police state advocate it somewhere else, it's people like you that gave men like Hitler his authority - you simpleton.
Jack
October 7, 2008
10:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
TheGuyOverThere:
"How many innocent people have been killed because cops thought they had weapons on them?"
None. Innocent people don't run from the Police and they cooperate with commands given.
Sweetpea:
"seems like a shot in the leg or the foot would have been more appropriate than in the throat! "
The shot in the throat was probably not exactly intentional. Cops are trained to shoot for "center of mass", which is the chest/abdomen. Probably, the suspect was in motion as well as the Officer. The throat is only a few inches above "center of mass".
October 7, 2008
10:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
BroncoDan writes:
Hey, I kinda agree with sheepherder!
October 7, 2008
10:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
CountryRoad writes:
Just another case of cops watching too much tv. Had to stop the guy by crashing into him with his car, and then pulling a gun and shooting him. Doesnt seem like non-leathal measures to me.Cops need to stop using their cars as battering rams, and carrying semi-automatic 40 caliber handguns, its too easy to just keep pulling the trigger when your excited. 3 shots to drop a drunk seems excessive. I am sure he probably emptied the clip(10 rounds) but only managed to him him 3 times, typical.
October 7, 2008
10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
philvysor writes:
I wonder if he is a illegal immigrant? Deport Him!
October 7, 2008
10:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
LadyBird112 writes:
BigSky writes:
"TheGuyOverThere:
"How many innocent people have been killed because cops thought they had weapons on them?"
None. Innocent people don't run from the Police and they cooperate with commands given."
No s**t. I'll be the first to go off on police brutality, but honestly. Don't run from the cop, don't get shot. Simple. No, 777, saying that doesn't give police permission to do what they want--it's common sense. Don't run, and if you do, don't whine about getting shot afterwards. Especially when you're endangering others.
October 7, 2008
10:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
theguyoverthere writes:
Are you all forgotting about the mentally handicaped kid in Denver last year or two years ago that got killed by the cops because he had a comb in his hand? Innocent people die because cops are taught to shoot to kill, but of course people don't pay attention for very long. I understand people shouldn't run from the cops, but sometimes people are doing what they are supposed to, the cop gets jumpy, and shoots to kill.
October 7, 2008
10:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Denverselect writes:
LdyBird112-
I agree..if this guy would have killed someone then everyone would be saying "why didn't the cops do something!" If you don't want to get shot then don't run from the police....I'm sure he had a warrant and he was drunk so I have no simpathy for him-because he could have killed someone's family-
October 7, 2008
10:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
theguyoverthere writes:
I agree the cop taking the guy down and taking out his car. I just don't agree with the cop shooting the guy in the neck, hand, and abdomen. A shot in the leg would have been enough to subdue the guy.
October 7, 2008
10:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
redwhiteandBLUE writes:
Police think they saw something 'shiny' and shoot to kill. Remember the innocent man, living in the projects a few years ago ? The police went on a domestic call. They climed a ladder into his window and shot and killed him. He was watching T.V. and drinking a 'pepsi'. Minding his own business.
Police do step out of their boundries. I swear if you can help it ..stay away from them. I advise my young adults..never run (they will shoot you in the back) and if you're stopped for any reason be respectful. (don't give them a reason to beat you )
October 7, 2008
10:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
datbinnurick writes:
Oh, Jack... anything to say besides insulting people??? Also, maybe you ought to learn about History before drawing parallels!
October 7, 2008
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
TheGuyOverThere:
You aren't by chance talking about THIS case are you? Way to ignore the facts and spread whatever lie supports your point of view. You'll make a great Democrat someday.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPT...
This was a mentally ill 15 year old with a KNIFE (not a comb). The Police were NOT informed that he was mentally challenged and he was threatening his family and the cops with the knife.
His family CALLED the Police BECAUSE the kid was threatening people with the knife.
And it is the exact same lesson:
When you pose a potential threat to others and refuse to comply with Police - You get SHOT.
October 7, 2008
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
" Johnson wouldn't say whether the suspect are armed or had attacked or threatened the deputy, stressing that the investigation was continuing. "
That means we haven't decided on what SPIN and LIES we will tell.
We will issue a statement as soon as we do CYA measures...
October 7, 2008
10:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
theguyoverthere writes:
"A shot in the leg would have been enough to subdue the guy"
Not likely. Depending on the guy's state of mind and the drugs (if any) that he is on, a shot in the leg is likely to just P*ss him off.
October 7, 2008
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
theguyoverthere writes:
BigSky182, maybe I got my stories mixed up, but there was an incident in Denver where someone was shot holding a comb. Don't be such an A** to people, what did I ever do to you, jerk.
October 7, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
Never fails.... criminal decides to flee, risk other people's lives as he runs, refuses to be arrested for his felonies, threatens the life of a police officer..... and some low IQ types whine about everyone except the criminal.
Of course, the same low IQ types come up with all kinds of Monday morning quarterback claims.....
"the cop should have shot him in the leg, like I saw in a movie once. If it worked for Bruce Willis in Die Hard, then it should work in the real world too."
"the cop should have used ESP to anticipate the criminal's actions, and went to his home to beg him not to do it before the criminal did it."
"the cop overreacted". This excuse is usually used by the hypocrites who would be whining if bystanders had been hurt by the criminal when he was weaving into traffic, and attacked the cops for not stopping the criminal by ramming his car when they had the chance.
The good news is that the morons on here claiming the cop was drunk, whining about the cop "overreacting", or thinking that movies prove that leg shots work wonders, make up the miniscule 1% of the public that is stupid enough to blame cops for the actions of criminals. The same idiotic 1% that are the first to whine that cops DIDN'T do enough, when THEY are the victims of criminal punks.
October 7, 2008
11 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
What you did to me was make weepy, sympathetic excuses for some ignorant tool who managed to get himself shot by running from the Police and resisting arrest.
The Police have a hard enough job to do with bad guys assaulting and or killing them everyday without bleeding hearts like you spreading inaccurate versions of history, claiming that Cops kill innocent people, and finding fault with Police policy.
How about YOU go stand in the street and let a few punks take pot shots at you for an hour or so and THEN you'll be qualified to criticize.
October 7, 2008
11:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
blindrid writes:
Sorry as I will disagree with some of you but if I'm threatened I would certainly not worry about the issue of shooting to disable. I'll be damned if I would take the chance of shooting someone in the leg etc.......I know I would prefer to go home.
You don't even know what even occurred and some are taking the criminal's side regardless of the events.
October 7, 2008
11:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
HSTOWEL writes:
For you morons shooting criticism at the cops, how about letting the investigation take its course? I wonder how some of you would react and perform if you were placed in the situation? For the people who think the cop should have just shot him in the leg it's readily apparent that you don't have a clue about using firearms in a real situation. You probably believe that the cops should be able to just shoot the gun out of a suspect's hands. You also probably believe that the CSI shows showcase real law enforcement capabilities. Things must be swell in your worlds.
October 7, 2008
11:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Squatch writes:
Was he a gangbanger? If so people will say he deserved like the little American/Mexican kid that got his guts stomped. At least when the kid ran he didn't endanger anybody like this guy did driving like a maniac.
October 7, 2008
11:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
theguyoverthere writes:
When the situation warrants it I have no problem with the cops shooting to kill, my problem is that is all they are taught it seems. Sometimes other options are warranted. Am I glad this drunk fool is off the streets, you bet I am. Nothing in the article states why the cops shot the person, so you could be wrong, I could be wrong, we don't know yet. Why you have to be going off on these hissy fits I'll never know. I just know that in my opinion, it seems like cops have been using more excessive force than necessary in certain situations as of late. I have never been in trouble with the law, but I know if I was, I would be on pins and needles because of how trigger happy so many cops seems to be. However I will state that there are plenty of good cops out there doing their jobs properly and I appreciate their hard work.
October 7, 2008
11:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
One more reason not to drink and drive. Poor guy. I'm sure this will be a lasting (permanantly) sober experience that cost far more than he was willing to pay.
The Law carried the bigger stick, after all.
I.
October 7, 2008
11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
theguyoverthere writes:
I am not so naive enough that I believe someone in a high stress situation could shoot a gun out of someone's hand.
October 7, 2008
11:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
Arm chair quarterbacks have an easy job. Problem is they were not in the game. We do not know what happened for sure in this situation. However, most police officers don't shoot first and ask questions later. After catching someone in a car who refuses to pull over, the situation is a tense one. None of us are qualified to judge the police officer until all the facts are in. Most people who talk smack about police officers are people who have run-ins with them. I have said it once and I will say it again, most police officers are decent people with a difficult job.
October 7, 2008
11:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
RealifeTauren writes:
When threatened, you shoot at the largest mass to stop the target quickly. The torso (chest) is the target of choice. Hand guns are not very stable or accurate, and the rounds did not hit where they were aimed (though aimed is a bit of an exaggeration, more like pointed). The desired result was achieved, the threatening subject was stopped. While it's a romantic Hollywood notion to suggest disabling a perpetrator by shooting them in the leg (or some other non-life threatening area), in reality you do not have the time to aim, and nor should you.
Never forget that the job of the police force is just a job, and they have the right to go home to their families each night. If any person acts in any threatening way toward a police officer, whereby there is a remote chance that the officers safety could be at risk, he or she has the right to neutralize the threat and go home to his or her family. If you're stupid to give the officer a reason to stop you using force, you should pay the penalty for forcing another human to make that choice.
October 7, 2008
11:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
" I would be on pins and needles because of how trigger happy so many cops seems to be"
That's kind of the whole point... you SHOULD be on pins and needles when confronted by the Cops. The likely reason that you feel "it seems like cops have been using more excessive force than necessary in certain situations as of late" is because that's how the "news" papers report it.
That's also why your comments struck a nerve with me. The general public is just FAR too eager to assume that "the Cops had other choices" or "They didn't need to KILL the poor misguided criminal".
Being a Policeman is living inside a Life or Death situation all day, every day. I say, until there is evidence to the contrary, if a Cop shoots a Person then there was likely a very good reason for it, and if the Person survives being shot, the Cop needs more range practice.
October 7, 2008
11:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
Milehighguy writes:
Why did the police chase him? Why did they shoot his adam's apple and pinky? Why did the police ram his car? Why don't police go after real criminals? Why don't police use paintball or bb guns instead of .40 cal pistols? Why do the police shoot to kill? Why don't police shoot for their feet? Why do police threaten people who are just running errands to the store? Why...
Why do we never ask what the "innocent" person could have done differently? Like maybe not run from the police?
October 7, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
anteup writes:
You don't even know what even occurred and some are taking the criminal's side regardless of the events.
blindrid, I'm afraid that happens way too often anymore. I'd like to see every officer in the country take a week off, let the anti-police liberals fend for themselves but I'd like to know ahead of time because I'll be damned if I aim for a leg!
October 7, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
sweetater writes:
guyoverthere, could you possibly be thinking of the young teenager that got shot in his home in the back who was deaf? That was a year or two before Paul Childs.I do not remember all details but I believe the officer who shot him was involved in another shooting kind of the same scenerio. There are alot of decent officers out there TRUE, and alot of bad also.
October 7, 2008
11:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Dick_Tater writes:
Shouldn't have brought beer muscles to a gun fight.
October 7, 2008
11:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
datbinnurick writes:
You all are crazy!!! Cops Trigger happy??? Always use excessive force? Do you guys not realize the amount of incidents a cop encounters on ONE single shift? Do you not realize that they put themselves in danger every day they work? And - how many cops use excessive force? how many are trigger happy??? Come on people - just cause you can read a couple stories in the news doesn't make the entire police force "trigger happy cause that's all they are taught". Use some common sense before saying stuff like that! And be greatful they are out there protecting you!
October 7, 2008
11:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
patchsl writes:
I grew up in Wash DC - gun capitol of the universe until they outlawed citizens possesing guns - now only criminals have 'em - but anyway, I saw lots of police stops... never saw a case where a suspect stopped, obeyed the lawful command of the officer, and was subsequently shot... saw lots of guys that tried to run, or drive away, or fight the officer, that got shot... and most of the time, the officer didn't have time to draw his weapon and position himself for a "disabling shot" - in a split second decision, he was lucky to be able to fire in self-defense and protect innocent citizens. Believe it or not, they are here to protect and serve us... and deserve our support (not second-guessing) - if you can't do the time, don't do the crime!
October 7, 2008
11:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
MattGuyver_007 writes:
Doesn't Grand County issue Tasers?
October 7, 2008
11:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
spencerr writes:
It sounds like, after the two cars were pulled over, there was a confrontation rather than a continuation of a chase. If the man had run from the cop, the cop would not have shot at him. Just sayin' that the cop was probably acting in self defense, and if the injured man was bull-rushing the cop, it would have been difficult for the cop to be completely accurate.
October 7, 2008
11:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
subsea writes: "jeeze i hate hearing how the poor cops got it so bad "
Two things:
First and foremost, thank you for your service, you're my hero.
Secondly, I am not at all saying "the poor cops have it so bad". I am saying "The Cops deserve the public's respect for stepping up and choosing to put their lives at risk to defend others." Much like Soldiers come to think of it.
October 7, 2008
11:57 a.m.
BroncoRick69 writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
October 7, 2008
12:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
gcrez writes:
I live up here, and I know the victim (open to interpretation) and a lot of the officers up here. I'm confident there was a valid reason he was shot, I believe the 23 year old was wrestling with the officer. If you are armed and someone goes for your weapon, guess what? Don't blame excessive force until the real story comes out.
October 7, 2008
12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Scott writes:
Rule #1: When you see red lights in your rear view mirror, PULL OVER!
Consequence #1: If you run from or threaten a cop, expect the worst.
It's actually quite simple.
Scott
October 7, 2008
12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
777J, you are a true moron. Police state? Give me a break! And yes, I want the cops to do whatever it takes to stop criminals. I do not apologize for criminals, and i could care less if they get shot by the cops. Maybe you should quit getting arrested so much idiot!
October 7, 2008
12:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
mmannino writes:
The facts are not clear in the article. This situation may involve excessive force. The driver caused a difficult situation by drinking and driving and then fleeing LE. If the driver did not have a weapon or a credible threat of a weapon, excessive force may be involved. An internal review and possibly a court may need to determine whether excessive force was used. Police have a difficult job with decision making under stressful circumstances. I am generally a LE supporter but I also realize that police must be held to high standards of conduct. I am not sure about the burden of proof on establishing reasonable procedure. If the situation gets to a court, the burden of proof will be to establish that a violation of reasonable police procedures occurred.
October 7, 2008
12:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
My guess is the guy went for the cops gun during an altercation, and guess what? When you don't bring your own gun to a gun fight, you're probably going to lose.
October 7, 2008
12:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
MileHighGuy,
All that suspense, all that drama build up....Just to point out the obvious? If the person had no reason (real or otherwise) to flee this could have been avoid. This is a sob story. Period.
I personally feel bad for this person, wish it could have ended differently. But Why are we expected to blame the officer for doing the job he is expected to do? If bad judgement was the case, than let him pay the punishment for it. But innocent until proven guilty should apply universally.
I.
October 7, 2008
12:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fred writes:
Same BS…Different story.
The same blind idiots defend every decision every cop makes, regardless of facts, and the other set of simpletons blame the cops for every confrontation regardless of fact.
I say we need to keep a notebook of the posters on each side of the discussion. They’ve proven to be too biased to take their opinions seriously.
Oh, and the cops on here that belong to the first category should be removed from the force. You are the ones the public needs to fear. At least the cop bashing simpletons don’t have a position of authority.
Let’s wait until the facts come out, ok?
October 7, 2008
12:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
philvysor writes:
Grand County, What a place for this to happen. The County only has like 1000 people in it and it is so wide spread I'm surprised they even were able to catch the guy. There is only like 1 Sheriff and 1 Deputy (Andy & Barney). This guy was an idiot to get caught. What a D@#% A**!
October 7, 2008
12:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
I DO WANT TO POINT OUT:
Officers often are wrong and neglectful in good judgement when it involves a citizens pets. Friendly ones, for that matter. I've done quiet a bit of research and have come to startling and rather terrible conclusions that pets are often easy target practice for officers of the law. Not all, thank god. But for many more than there should be. We expect and deserve officers who uphold fair judgement on pets, not the trigger happy executionars of our beloved four legged family members.
We dont live in Iran, so dogs are not illegal to own here. Citizens that fail to properly produce good k9 citizens are the bigger threats to society, as they will continue to produce the same results time and time again with other k9s.
Just felt like pointing that out.
I.
October 7, 2008
12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
Well, I guess we should all just listen to Fred because his is the only opinion that counts...
October 7, 2008
12:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
And Fred, maybe the cops on here are a little more informed/educated on these matters. What do you do for a living Fred? Anything that maked you an authority on the topic?
October 7, 2008
12:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
What probably would have been a simple DUI has now ended up with the kid possibly paralyzed.
Make no mistake. Once the kid CHOOSE to run, he was responsible for the outcome.
October 7, 2008
12:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
Agree Cowboy, I get sick of the criminal apologists. Arent we supposed to despise criminals in our society?
October 7, 2008
12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
italiantony writes:
article is not very clear at all... it does not say in what order the wounds where given... maybe he did try and stop the suspect with a grazing wound... hence the pinky!
October 7, 2008
12:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
hottopic2999 writes:
Sounds like this little snot had it coming.
October 7, 2008
12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fred writes:
Sheep, (good name for you)
You're correct you should listen to me and wait for the facts to come out before jumping to conclusions. That was the only opinion I offered. The rest, about posters posting biased to one side or another was fact. You are a prime example and if a cop and threat to society.
What I do for a living is none of your business and not relevant. I’m not the one using questionable judgment.
I’m an authority on many subjects but still try and wait for fact to come out before making assumptions.
October 7, 2008
1:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
datbinnurick writes:
Fred - if you hate our posts so much and think we are all beneath you - get away from the computer - we don't need your insults.
October 7, 2008
1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
happymike44 writes:
Lets blame the victim for this we know he has a mental disability.
We don't know if he was off his meds.
We don't know the mental state of the police officer.
I understand this disease as my sister suffers from it.
It is very hard and it takes a toll on the family for you worry day and night for their safety.
So I wonder how many of you want this child to be your brother or son.
I will pray for this poor man and his family.
The officer needs to learn to use a stun gun instead of a handgun.
October 7, 2008
1:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
gcrez writes:
philvysor, do a little research before you go running your uneducated mouth. Check out the census!
October 7, 2008
1:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
tbrittreid writes:
Interesting. In most such shootings, the police have a detailed account (read: their version) of the incident out quite quickly, but not this time. Could it be this cop isn't going to be covered up for, but be allowed to stand or fall on the actual facts?
October 7, 2008
1:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
BroncoRick69 writes:
lol I posted a comment that stated we should fight for what little rights we have left as Americans, and the RMN removed it. Wow.
October 7, 2008
1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
theairdog writes:
sweetpea313 writes:"If he was running from the law, seems like a shot in the leg or the foot would have been more appropriate than in the throat! Wouldn't a shot in the abdomen have sufficed to bring him down? I'm not sticking up for the drunk driver, but something sounds wrong about this."
theguyoverthere writes: "This is the thing I don't like about the police philosophies of shoot first ask questions later. How many innocent people have been killed because cops thought they had weapons on them? Cops should be taught to shoot to disable, not shoot to kill."
Well, you two have just demonstrated how ignorant you are on this subject area. I suggest you stop watching cop shows and movies. Take a basic firearms course, and then come back and tell us about shooting someone in the leg or shooting to disable.
October 7, 2008
1:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
BroncoRick69 writes:
Maybe it was the cop being drunk comment. sheesh.
October 7, 2008
1:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Dick_Tater writes:
A stun gun and/or pepper spray would do little to deter a person who is in a psychotic episode.
October 7, 2008
1:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
psu96 writes:
if you are running from the cops seems to me the cop should be in good physical shape to keep chase not shoot me. or do cops receive more training with their guns but have no oversight of their physical conditioning. 100 miles and running.
October 7, 2008
1:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fred writes:
datbinnurick,
I didn't insult you....unless of course you earned it by blindly taking one side of the debate or the other consistently without regard for fact.
I'll say it again, wait for facts before commenting or comment on the facts at hand.
For example, someone suggesting that the kid who was shot should have known better and contributed to his getting shot by running is an opinion based on fact. The kid ran from an officer of the law and therefore holds some responsibility for the outcome. However, that's not what we're seeing from story to story with the same tired biased posters like sheephearder. He/she seems to root for police shootings regardless of facts.
October 7, 2008
1:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
roger44 writes:
He was off his meds. Alcohol sets off the problem, did it before. Family knows this and should have someone with him. And to the Vet from Desert storm, no offense, I'm a Vet too, but not much hand to hand combat in that skirmish, talk to Korean vets who were charged by enemy on drugs and see what it's like---
October 7, 2008
1:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
MeAgain writes:
Um, this should be a no brainer.
Break the Law = Pay the Price.
The injuries produced, however, could be criticized. Those are bizarre places to get shot. My 40 cal can empty a clip (14+1) through a target the size of your head in under 5 seconds from about 50 feet. I'm not a cop (I'm a school teacher) but I consider myself to be a pretty good shot. Even under pressure, I would expect the police to have better aim. Then again, I'm sure more details of this will come out over time. Do tell, do tell.
October 7, 2008
1:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
SierraStorm writes:
There are too many cases where police use lethal force when it is not needed or could be replaced by non lethal means. As a fugitive recovery agent, private police, not public police, I have been in too many instances where a cop would have shot my skip for the same reasons that I have encountered. I have used a tactical light to defuse and delay an knife attack by restricting my opponents vision, or on one occasion, mace came in very handy. Just a few nights ago, I had a skip charge me with his automobile where I was directly in front of him. I drew my weapon and expected him to stop for fear of being shot, that did not work. Within approx. a 40ft. distance, thinking was within nano seconds; I could shoot to stop and have an uncontrolled auto entering a lane traffic and still get myself ran over or do as I did and jump out of the way letting him go. There are too many instances where a defendant is considered a threat and shooting is considered a first line option. Too many instances that a killing could be avoided while other less lethal means are available. Some people are too damn ego struck and willing to put a notch on their gun without thinking about the liability that follows. Criminal court might free the shooter, but civil court might ruin him/her for life. There is an Arapaho county deputy that will be finding that out in the near future after shooting an unarmed citizen while in an off duty argument with that citizen. One can always run, keep backing up, call for help. Shooting is a last option; especially when there are too many other less than lethal options.
October 7, 2008
1:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
gcrez writes:
The injuries would lead me to believe that there was a physical struggle. At point blank range, such a wide grouping would only mean that both the shooter and the target were moving. I'm a wrestler and avid shooter, and I can see how his aim could have been a little off.
October 7, 2008
1:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
SierraStorm writes:
shooting to disable??????
theguyoverthere writes: "This is the thing I don't like about the police philosophies of shoot first ask questions later. How many innocent people have been killed because cops thought they had weapons on them? Cops should be taught to shoot to disable, not shoot to kill."
---------------------------------------------
When you pull your weapon in a confrontation, you had better have a damn good reason and that reason has to be to use the force in your hand to "stop", not maim. If you intend to maim and do so, you had better have a lot of money, assets or whatever because you are going to loose those in defending yourself for having committed bodily enjury. Should lethal force be necessary, you shoot to "stop"....
Sierra Storm
------------------------------------
As "airdog" states
As Well, you two have just demonstrated how ignorant you are on this subject area. I suggest you stop watching cop shows and movies. Take a basic firearms course, and then come back and tell us about shooting someone in the leg or shooting to disable.
-------------------------------------------------
" And I will tell you that it takes much more than a basic firearms course to know when the threat requires pulling the trigger let alone drawing from the holster"! Always think- Level of threat Vs. level of liability, be it cop or civilian.
Sierra Storm
October 7, 2008
1:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
JluvDC writes:
There isn't enough info here to determine why the cop shot. I'm sure those details will eventually be released. If he was drunk he may have had a broken bottle or something that he threatened the officer with, who knows.
Anyway, what I find sad about this is that the poor kid couldn't afford the medication that he needed to control his mental illness. Its sickening that his pills cost $300 a month and unfortunate that he was unable to keep taking them because of the cost.
October 7, 2008
2:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
McGowdog writes:
It's a sad deal for the mom and the sister to see this guy fighting for his life, one with possible life-long paralysis if he makes it.
Now, drug induced schizophrenia or whatever; first of all, what was he doing drinking? If he can't afford the 300/month meds, the ??/month booze ain't cutting it either. Another thing; what in the world is he doing driving? Returning that DVD ain't that important that he should be driving at all. This is proof of that.
Threatening oncoming traffic, whatever the circumstances is never a win-win situation. I've managed to not threaten on-coming traffic for 26 years on the road and counting.
This guy should have had someone driving him, period.
October 7, 2008
2:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
O_TRAIN writes:
I agree there are not enough details to fully know what happened.
The questions I have are; did this guy have a license? If so, why would it be a good idea to have a schizophrenic-alcoholic, who is off their medication out driving? If he didn't have a license, and under his circumstances, why would his family be OK with him out driving, shopping etc..
My sympathies to the family, but it sounds like it was only a matter of time before this guy created an incident. As a member of society I'm grateful he didn't take out any innocent victims.
October 7, 2008
2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
"North said alcohol triggers her son's schizophrenic episodes."
If the kid was this obviously at risk: Why does he have access to alcohol and why was he out driving alone?
CHOICES AND RESPONSIBILITY.
October 7, 2008
2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
esarem writes:
This could all be avoided if we fit all PD weapons with special locks and then establish a department of psychologists and social workers who have master keys for said weapons. This group can then field evaluators to all police/citizen conflicts to determine it would be appropriate to enable any potentially leathal weapons. We will do this for the protection of our peace officers as well as the crime-committing community who, after all, are people too.
October 7, 2008
2:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
Some of the weirdest "blame the cop" excuses from the "criminal is the victim" crowd........
"One can always run, keep backing up, call for help. " - Yeah. Have the cops run away when a criminal assaults them. That should ensure that even MORE criminals resist arrest. Or how about the "call for help" line.... I can see it now.... criminal assaults the cop, and some idiots in the community demand that the cop allow the assault to continue, while calling for help! And what happens when the help arrives.... the assaults continue, while now multiple cops call even more cops to come, and the cycle continues endlessly. Sounds more like the Keystone Kops Strategy for law enforcement, rather than a reality based idea.
"I'm not a cop (I'm a school teacher) but I consider myself to be a pretty good shot. Even under pressure, I would expect the police to have better aim."
Uh.... how many times was the tin can you were shooting at, attacking you? Did that paper target start beating you up? Was the paper target running at you with a weapon? Was the tin can trying to take away your weapon and use it on you? I bet your reaction would be identical to the police officer if it had been.
October 7, 2008
2:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
McGowdog writes:
""BroncoRick69 writes:
lol I posted a comment that stated we should fight for what little rights we have left as Americans, and the RMN removed it. Wow."""
10 If Not BroncoRick69, then goto 30
20 Print (this comment was removed by the site staff)
30 Print <input>
October 7, 2008
2:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
gregu710 writes:
Always nice to see the usual crowd speculating about why the cop shot, why the guy didn't stop, etc... without being there or knowing the facts. Waste of air. What should be the bigger question here, as JluvDC mentions, is the ridiculous cost of the meds. $300 a month for a stupid bottle of pills? Had the stupid pills been made somewhat affordable, he might have been on them and this whole incident would probably not occurred. Of course, I also agree that he shouldn't have been out driving or alone, but sadly he was, and I'm sure his family will be second-guessing their decision for the rest of their lives, which should make some of you who are so self-righteous feel much better. And no, he shouldn't have been drininking either, but then again, if there had been some kind of program that he could have been in, where he was given counseling and the meds, he could've turned himself around, gotten a job, and then gotten to the place where he could afford the meds, and been better off. But, no money, no meds, no meds, no job, no job, no money, no money, no meds, and so the vicious circle goes...
October 7, 2008
2:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
NeilT writes:
Cowboy-"If the kid was this obviously at risk: Why does he have access to alcohol and why was he out driving alone?"
The "kid" is 23-years-old.
I wonder how much this family spends on smokes in a month. The pic of the 17-year-old sister is too much.
Choices and responsibility?
The whole family chooses to spend what little money they have on cigarettes and fail in their responsibility to their son/brother.
October 7, 2008
2:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
philvysor writes:
gcrez, What's wrong did touch a nerve. Did I upset you for some reason?
October 7, 2008
2:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
McGowdog writes:
""gregu710 writes:
...as JluvDC mentions, is the ridiculous cost of the meds. $300 a month for a stupid bottle of pills? Had the stupid pills been made somewhat affordable, he might have been on them and this whole incident would probably not occurred."""
I guess you don't guys don't know much about meds. My oldest brother is a paranoid-schizophenic and his meds are $1000.00 monthly. I guess he's got it worse than most.
When he was young, he stole a vehicle and wrapped it around a lamp post doing about 110 on the wrong side of the road. He's not a good driver. Now that he's older and far removed from forensic troubles, he could technically get a driver's license. There'd be nothing legally stopping him. But he's just about blind and can't pass the eye test. I say thank God for that, for our sakes. That's no lie.
October 7, 2008
2:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
datbinnurick writes:
esarem - great idea - I'm sure the criminal will stay put and hold off assaulting a cop while waiting for these field evaluators to come and unlock the guns! WHAT???
October 7, 2008
2:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
seattle_girl writes:
NeilT writes:
"I wonder how much this family spends on smokes in a month. The pic of the 17-year-old sister is too much.
Choices and responsibility?
The whole family chooses to spend what little money they have on cigarettes and fail in their responsibility to their son/brother."
I was wondering when someone was going to notice that and comment on it. I was thinking the same thing. Great parenting!! Hey mom, how bout another pack of smokes for the 17 yr old and another 6 pack for the kid with mental problems!
October 7, 2008
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
jjez writes:
earem writes: "This could all be avoided if we fit all PD weapons with special locks and then establish a department of psychologists and social workers who have master keys for said weapons. This group can then field evaluators to all police/citizen conflicts to determine it would be appropriate to enable any potentially leathal weapons. We will do this for the protection of our peace officers as well as the crime-committing community who, after all, are people too." And what does the cop tell the perp: hang on, I gotta call my shrink to get my gun unlocked so I can shoot you! In a life and death situation, there's no time to call for someone to unlock the gun. The cop would be dead before he got a chance to call anyone! And another criminal would be free to kill again.
October 7, 2008
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
MavrickG writes:
Has money to buy cigarettes, boose, and drugs, but can't afford his medication. Sick of hearing this whimpy junk.
October 7, 2008
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Scott writes:
esarem must be a psycho-babblist grad from the University of Cocaine, Stonerville. Only a psycho-babble grad could come up with a line of stupidity like it did.
Scott
October 7, 2008
2:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
mmannino writes:
JluvDC,
Can you manufacture the medication for less? If you can, please undercut the manufacturer on the price of this medication. Why do you think that $300 is not a reasonable price? Do you think that producers have a right to determine the prices of their products? If you and like-minded others force the manufacturer to sell the medication at the price that you determine is reasonable, the supply of medication will decrease. Price controls lead to lower production, higher demand, and less innovation.
The article does not indicate that he could not afford the medication. The article indicates that he chose not to pay for the medication. The article also indicates that he chose to drink knowing the alcolol has an adverse impact on his mental state.
October 7, 2008
3:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Billy writes:
There are a lot of stupid, mean hearted people in Colo. They are the ones that have that western mentality of shoot first ask questions later. You can bet your retirement if it were one of their children they would be screaming brutality the loudest.
October 7, 2008
3:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustSayin writes:
I'm in stocks - I am betting my retirement! 8^}
October 7, 2008
3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
COGrownFarmBoy writes:
I'm still trying to figure out how he left the house at 6:30 to run these errands and by 7:00 he was driving drunk down the wrong side of the highway.
I do feel sorry for the family but either he was drunk before he left and they shouldn't have let him go or his condition is a whole lot worse than this story is leading us to believe.
We don't have enough facts to know whether the police overreacted or not but it is clear that this kid shouldn't have been driving and sounds to me like the family should have dealt with the problem.
October 7, 2008
3:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
JluvDC writes:
mmannino, I do believe in this country we get ripped off on the cost of prescription drugs. Because the US is a wealthy nation, we pay the cost of the research in addition to manufacturing. Other less wealthy nations get the same drugs at manufacture cost. I get that it is expensive to manufacture/market/research them, but I also think that if the government can subsidize wooden arrows for children, we could subsidize the cost of research for medication. Part of any government health plan should certainly include huge tax breaks for drug manufacturers so that they can pass that savings on to people.
It makes me really sad to read that someone's relation has to pay $1000 a month for medication, that is almost my mortgage payment. And that should bother people.
For those speculating on why could he afford alcohol but not drugs. $300 a pop is a lot of money that you have to pay all at once. You can buy a bottle of alcohol for under $20 and even if he spent a total of $300 or more on alcohol its likely spread out over a period of time and an alcoholic probably doesn't realize (like a lot of people with addictions) exactly how much money they are really spending (because the cost is spread out).
October 7, 2008
3:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
denverrma writes:
Some of you keep saying that the innocent keep getting shot in Denver. Driving erratically, swerving into oncoming traffic (possibly drunk) and evading police is not innocent. This cop saved lives because this guy, mentally ill or not, was taken off the road.
October 7, 2008
3:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
datbinnurick writes:
Farm Boy - you are so right...that family that appears to be living together should have ensured he has access to his medications and that he did not drink. Now - I know you can't keep an eye on your kids at all times, but the meds should have been provided. Now I don't know their financials - but from the photo - both Mom and daughter smoke - so that's about $200 a month right there - then the story says mom and daughter went to dinner... he was returning a DVD rental and had been drinking- so the money was there - just a matter of how it was spent, right??? Sorry - I do understand mental illness - even the fact that those pills make the person feel very different, but as a society we - especially the families of those- need to take responsibility and supervise, help and ensure they don't hurt themselves or others!
October 7, 2008
3:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Scott writes:
Uh Billy, us Bible and gun clinging westerners also watch out for our kids ... even when they are 23 years old. Therefore, if this kid were mine I'd be look out for him each day. I know that the phrase is foreign to you libs, but it's call "Looking out for your fellow man."
Also, us Bible and gun clingers do not need a government mandate or taxpayer monies to look out for each other. We do this on our own simply because it is the right thing to do.
Scott
October 7, 2008
3:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Billy writes: "There are a lot of stupid, mean hearted people in Colo."
Then please feel free to either leave or don't come back.
There's nothing "stupid or mean hearted" in saying make you're Choices and accept your Responsibility.
This entire episode is completely avoided if the kid just pulls over.
October 7, 2008
3:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Billy writes:
Cowboy, the comment wasn't meant for the sheriff who shot him. It was for people like you who think you have the answers to all the problems in society when you state your foolish posts. But I guess this is America, freedom of speech and all.
October 7, 2008
3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
NyAxter writes:
Swerving into oncoming traffic? Maybe he was suicidal and not drunk. We won't know that until they release his BAC (blood alcohol content). he left his house at 6:30 and the incident started at 7:00? That's a pretty short time to get that polluted. And it takes twenty plus minutes to get to Winter Park from Granby. Schizophrenia is hard thing to predict. This could be a case of SBC (suicide by cop). One thing's for sure we don't know how to handle the mentally ill in this country. Mental illness costs all of us in ways that we can't even calculate.
October 7, 2008
3:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
snuffalupagus writes:
Sorry, I don't feel an ounce of sympathy for the kid, but I feel for the parents. The 23 yr old could have easily killed someone else on that highway, using his vehicle as a weapon. For all you morons that want to condemn the deputy first before getting all the facts to this story, get a clue!!!
October 7, 2008
4:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
vipbblueyedmom writes:
Maybe you guys should get the whole story before posting your opinions out there. This 23 year old man is my friend as well as is his family. He left the house sober so yea no drunk driving there. We will not know the whole story because this young man can’t talk or stand up for himself. But to shot not only once but three times is not right. That cop could have killed just as many people with that gun than David could have done with that car. You and I don’t know if he was speeding or what the situation was, the only people that do is that cop that thought he had to shoot David and David. This is a sad time not only for family but for friends as well and I think that they need support and not opinions of outsiders!!
October 7, 2008
4:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Billy - rather than resorting to childish name calling, why don't you explain to us why expecting people to be held accountable for their CHOICES is "foolish"?
Choices and Responsibility. Sorry if "personal accountability" offends you Billy.
October 7, 2008
5:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
informationmunky writes:
shot in the hand, abdoman and neck?? well getting shot in the hand would be a huge indicator of someone grabbing or reaching for a weapon. If he did this, then it was his own fault for getting shot. if he was a diagnosed schitzo, that had only had episodes when drinking alchohol. It's pretty much his own fault for drinking, if thats the case.. but shouldn't he have thought to refill the script once he ran out? but the report did say he was swerving into oncoming traffic, and refused to pull over.. regaudless of all you police brutality screamers say. 99% of these "tragic shootings" could be avoided if people follow 1 simple rule.
1.) DON'T RUN. running makes the cop nervous. he doesn't know why your running. and he SHOULD assume that you are armed at this point. and lets face it. If your driving a car, carreening in to oncoming traffic at highspeeds,,, I don't care if you have a gun or not, your sitting in a deadly weapon.
How many time have you read about some one that pulls over like their supposed to, and follows all the cops commands, and then the cop just walks up and shoots them for the hell of it..
October 7, 2008
7:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen21 writes:
This is the WORST news story. What ever happened to reporting the facts? This is an opinionated, slanted trash piece of .... well, it's not journalism!!!!
Yes the mother is upset, what mother wouldn't be? The driver - swerving into other lanes posed a serious danger! I don't know what happened that the officer felt threatened enough to shoot, but until all the facts are in, I will reserve my judgement. The RMN should have too!
October 7, 2008
10:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Openminded1 writes:
People please read the article: The cruiser and the Ford collided near Fraser, Johnson said. The deputy and the driver left their vehicles and during a confrontation, the deputy shot the man in the abdomen and the throat.
Maybe the schitzo was trying to grab the gun.
October 7, 2008
10:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
GCB writes:
I am a good friend of the victim. I would just like to let everyone know that the toxicology report came back negative. He didn't have felonies or warrants... They're not releasing the name of the officer or any details, not even to the family. For what reason, so they have time to create their own version of the story. Twist it so they are not resposible for this. David is in ICU unable to talk and unable to move (except for his arms, slightly) We will not know what really happend. Why 3 shots? the groin, the abdomen and the throat. The shot in the throat was dead on. How much confrontation could there possibly been?! Trigger happy pigs...
"Your misguided attitude simply gives the police license to do what ever they want (and unless you're a complete fool you understand that can be bad - see constitution). If you want to live in a police state advocate it somewhere else, it's people like you that gave men like Hitler his authority - you simpleton."
Jack
Thank you Jack. thank you.
October 7, 2008
11:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
redwhiteandBLUE writes:
Scott @12:06pm
Exactly what I said! Do not run..pull over..keep hands where cops can see them..watch your words and attitude,etc...etc.
You can't trust them..some may be good , some may not..why take the chance. They're trained to hit the bulls-eye. Don't be a sitting duck for them.
October 8, 2008
12:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
voleary64 writes:
has any one actually been in this situation?? If you where the police how would you handle it different if you were faced with this situation?
October 8, 2008
7:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
Jack and CGB...if you are so misguided that you actually believe this is a police state, maybe you should leave the country and try to see asylum elsewhere. If the cop was in fear for his life, he had every right to pull the trigger as many times as he wanted to until the threat stopped. Quit coddling criminals!
October 8, 2008
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
"Trigger happy pigs..." says GCB. How many shootings do cops get into? Not many. How many shooting are done by criminal thugs...too many to count. Quit defending criminal thugs!
October 8, 2008
8:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
BroncoRick69 writes:
A 'police state' can have different meanings to different people. Generally when someone mentions police state in this context it refers to the fact that Colorado is a police-friendly state, where the cop-to-citizen ratio is much higher in favor of police than in other states. In this context Colorado always has been a police state. Not too many people appreciate being harassed by cops with nothing better to do. This happens way more than it is reported. It's a privacy issue, not a criminal/non-criminal issue. One of the many slow erosions of our rights as Americans.
October 8, 2008
9:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen21 writes:
According to the mother (North) in an article in the DP, she said her son son sometimes loses his temper. Awhile back, someone hit his work truck in the post office parking lot in Granby; he got so upset that it took four police officers to restrain him, North said.
The cops did thier job in stopping this guy. What transpired when they were trying to arrest him? Given the 23-year old's history with needing restraint, we don't know. Stop crucifying the police for doing their jobs. Wait for the facts....something the paper should be emphasizing.
October 8, 2008
9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen21 writes:
GCB...My sympathies do go out to the family as this is a sad situation. BUT...what are the facts? Do you know? No. You were not there. Stop the accusations. The police are not releasing anything because they are tired of getting sued for doing their job! Reserve judgment till all the facts are in.
October 8, 2008
3:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
COGrownFarmBoy writes:
It's interesting in that the Denver Post included a statement from the mother where she stated that sometime recently her son had been so mad about someone hitting his truck in a parking lot that it took 4 officers to restrain him. I am not saying that shooting the guy 3 times was right but I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt at the moment. Driving the wrong way down the highway 30 minutes after leaving his house and with this type of temper...there is something wrong...
October 9, 2008
10:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
peacemaker9 writes:
I want to start of by saying I completely understand why the officer had to run David off the road. He was endangering others in what I believe was pursuit of harming himself. But that is my own opinion. Being a mother of young children I do not condone these actions under any circumstances. I do have to say I believe that if David had harmed someone else he would have been overwelmed with grief. With that said I would like to say that at this point no one knows if he was drunk. From everything I have heard his drug and alcohol screen came back clean. I know for a fact David does not do drugs! He had a streak when he was a teenager when he hit a bad spot. It was during this time period that this drug induced schizophrenia began. It’s been about five years since his drug use stopped from what I know. He has been a different person ever since in many ways. When David was young he was a shy, quiet and intelligent kid he was a very thoughtful and a caring guy. Now a days it seems like it is hard for him to process normal emotions. He seems often confused and depresses and goes through swings in personality and his ability to think cognitively. I truly feel he is unaware of his surroundings sometimes. He has lost most of his friends from younger years due to his mental state and swings. He often said things normal people wouldn’t say. Comment that show he is unaware of how others processed things. I want everyone on this site writing your options to understand that he wasn’t a criminal. In truth other than a DUI, I don’t think David have ever been in trouble. He is not a gangbanger he has lived in a small mountain town most his life it maybe all his life I didn’t meet him till he was ten. He is not an illegal alien or even a legal alien he is a 5’5 healthy white American young man. I also want you all of you to remember he has two younger sisters and a loving mother who are trying to sort out this awful occurrence. When it comes down to it he was a young man who works as an electrician and functions in society. He was off his medication and has a serious mental illness and had a break down. I do believe that the fact the police office shot him Four times is a bit excessive but that is police training and procedure. I do have to say however I think in this day and age we should be continuing the non lethal training of offices. We have a large amount of weaponry that would have been able to take him down with out paralyzing him for life and nearly killing him. I do not believe the police officer should be discredited for his services but I also don’t believe David should spend the rest of his life in prison paralyzed. I believe he was unaware of right and wrong and needs mental help. I am praying for everyone who was involved in this David, His family and Officer Rooks.
October 9, 2008
10:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
peacemaker9 writes:
A bit more info
1. When David left the house he was Sober
2. He lived with his mother and sister because they don't have a lot of money to them $300 is a lot of money a month
3. David does not have a history of being violent (The one case I’ve heard of is the truck thing)
4. David does not carry a weapon nor own any weapons.
5. The police office shoot 7 time and hit him 4 (I heard this from friends of the victim)
6. David does not have a problem with cops. I have known him to not only be friendly to them but to call them in times of need.
7. In grand county police offices do not get tazers unless they work in the Jail.
8. Most police officer in Grand County are rookies receiving training before going to cities with high crime rate.
9. David was not a criminal and had no warrants or felonies.
10. David is not just some schizo he is a friend, a son, a brother a human being
October 9, 2008
12:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
peacemaker9 writes:
http://www.skyhidailynews.com/article...
October 11, 2008
3:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
porker_077 writes:
I am close to david as well. I have lived with him and his family. I just wanted to tell all of those who are thinking good about david thanks. he is great spirits and is doing well. I would like all of you to send good thoughts to the family and to David. He has along road to recovery and the more go