WTF???

PALM HARBOR --
A Florida Highway Patrol officer has been suspended without pay for one week after firing off nine rounds of shots at a fleeing suspect last October.
Dashboard camera video shows Trooper Timothy Nichols driving around a retirement complex parking lot searching for Magdi Kanaan, 22, who allegedly stole two bacon, egg, and cheese sandwiches from a Palm Harbor gas station.
The video shows Nichols pull up behind Kanaan as he's backing up an SUV, which bumps into the trooper's cruiser. Nichols radioed to dispatch and then opened fire on the SUV, claiming he was fearing for his life.
After shooting nine rounds at the suspect, Nichols continued the chase, ultimately catching up and arresting Kanaan in a Palm Harbor neighborhood. Despite the multiple shots fired into his SUV, Kanaan was uninjured.
Kanaan was arrested for theft, aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer, and fleeing and eluding.
But when the Pinellas County State Attorney's Office looked at the dash cam video, they dismissed all charges against Kanaan and suggested the FHP open an investigation into Nichols' actions.
FHP Internal Affairs closed their investigation last week as they determined that Kanaan was trying to park, not attempting to run Nichols over.
According to the report: "Kanaan stated that he was merely attempting to evade Trooper Nichols and did not realize the Trooper had stopped behind him in the parking lot. he was attempting to back into a parking space when he struck the patrol car but was not attempting to run over the Trooper.''
During a taped interview, Nichols answered questions while being questioned by Lt. Bobby Collins.
Lt. Collins: “At what point, based on what you just told me, were you in fear of your life?”
Nichols: “When I was out of my vehicle, out of the protection of the patrol car, standing alongside of my vehicle towards the front, when the black SUV came in reverse in a manner where it was angled towards me I felt as though he was trying to run me down. Rather than hit the patrol car or do anything else.”
Lt. Collins: “When did you notice the reverse lights? Were you in the car or were you outside of the car?”
Nichols: “I was outside of the vehicle, outside of my patrol vehicle with my driver’s door open walking towards the front of it. That’s when I noticed that the reverse lights were on.”
Lt. Collins: “Is there a possibility that he had already began to travel in reverse while you still in the car?” Nichols: “I remember being out of my patrol car and seeing the reverse lights on and the vehicle coming at me. I don’t recall if it was coming at me while I was still in the patrol car or not.”
Nichols' dashboard cam video conclusively revealed that Nichols was still in his car when Kanaan began backing up and opened fire only after Kanaan began driving away.
In the same interview, Nichols defended his actions while speaking to Collins.
Nichols: "I don't believe I violated anything."
Lt. Collins: "Okay, so you feel that you were completely justified in your actions?"
Nichols: "Yes."
Collins, however, didn't feel the same and noticed some discrepancies.
Lt. Bobby Collins: "Your statements that you've given verbally and the statement that you've written don't match the video."
FHP officials ultimately decided that Nichols violated policy and should be suspended for one week without pay.
The official word from FHP was that Nichols 'used deadly force by firing upon a non-threatening suspect' while also running two stop signs during the pursuit.
Nichols begins his 40-hour suspension on Friday.

http://www.baynews9.com/video?clip=http ... o_0915.flv (http://www.baynews9.com/video?clip=http://static.baynews9.com/newsvideo/bn9/web_video/Trooper_Web_Video_0915.flv)
^^Copy and paste folks^^

Are you serious? Can ANYONE justify his actions? and for a breakfast sandwich?? Me thinks you guys better stay with investigating sg3/sg4's and writing cites. :roll:

So, trying to kill someone without any justification only results in a week off? If he could actually shoot and had killed the guy, would he have gotten 80 hours off?

Troopers have done far less and been dismissed.

And let's be clear, the original investigation into the shooting must have determined "justified". The ONLY reason he received ANY discipline is because the SAO saw what a shoddy case this was.

The Pinellas State Attorney hates FHP, is biased against FHP, and employs some of the most arrogant and sloven employees of any government official. McCabe shirks his responsibilities to the community every day of the week. :evil: :evil: :evil:

THE FACTS in the case called for the sig 3 /10 driver to have been charged and held for trial for the misdemeanor theft, the felony fleeing and elude, and the other charges. :idea: :idea:

The Trooper's behavior is a separate issue AND MIGHT be questionable, but given the current behaviors of all criminals (the theft from the store was criminal) causes every LEO to be concerned for his life being in danger when encountering all criminals. :x :x

Good luck Trooper!
:)

That trooper is a danger to the public, what next, someone does not roll down their window fast enough and he will start shooting at you?

He should be fired, he lacks complete common sense.

What did he hit ? Where did all the rounds go ? The fleeing vehicle doesn't appear to be hit,he needs to go to the range.LOL

PALM HARBOR --
A Florida Highway Patrol officer has been suspended without pay for one week after firing off nine rounds of shots at a fleeing suspect last October.
Dashboard camera video shows Trooper Timothy Nichols driving around a retirement complex parking lot searching for Magdi Kanaan, 22, who allegedly stole two bacon, egg, and cheese sandwiches from a Palm Harbor gas station.
The video shows Nichols pull up behind Kanaan as he's backing up an SUV, which bumps into the trooper's cruiser. Nichols radioed to dispatch and then opened fire on the SUV, claiming he was fearing for his life.
After shooting nine rounds at the suspect, Nichols continued the chase, ultimately catching up and arresting Kanaan in a Palm Harbor neighborhood. Despite the multiple shots fired into his SUV, Kanaan was uninjured.
Kanaan was arrested for theft, aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer, and fleeing and eluding.
But when the Pinellas County State Attorney's Office looked at the dash cam video, they dismissed all charges against Kanaan and suggested the FHP open an investigation into Nichols' actions.
FHP Internal Affairs closed their investigation last week as they determined that Kanaan was trying to park, not attempting to run Nichols over.
According to the report: "Kanaan stated that he was merely attempting to evade Trooper Nichols and did not realize the Trooper had stopped behind him in the parking lot. he was attempting to back into a parking space when he struck the patrol car but was not attempting to run over the Trooper.''
During a taped interview, Nichols answered questions while being questioned by Lt. Bobby Collins.
Lt. Collins: “At what point, based on what you just told me, were you in fear of your life?”
Nichols: “When I was out of my vehicle, out of the protection of the patrol car, standing alongside of my vehicle towards the front, when the black SUV came in reverse in a manner where it was angled towards me I felt as though he was trying to run me down. Rather than hit the patrol car or do anything else.”
Lt. Collins: “When did you notice the reverse lights? Were you in the car or were you outside of the car?”
Nichols: “I was outside of the vehicle, outside of my patrol vehicle with my driver’s door open walking towards the front of it. That’s when I noticed that the reverse lights were on.”
Lt. Collins: “Is there a possibility that he had already began to travel in reverse while you still in the car?” Nichols: “I remember being out of my patrol car and seeing the reverse lights on and the vehicle coming at me. I don’t recall if it was coming at me while I was still in the patrol car or not.”
Nichols' dashboard cam video conclusively revealed that Nichols was still in his car when Kanaan began backing up and opened fire only after Kanaan began driving away.
In the same interview, Nichols defended his actions while speaking to Collins.
Nichols: "I don't believe I violated anything."
Lt. Collins: "Okay, so you feel that you were completely justified in your actions?"
Nichols: "Yes."
Collins, however, didn't feel the same and noticed some discrepancies.
Lt. Bobby Collins: "Your statements that you've given verbally and the statement that you've written don't match the video."
FHP officials ultimately decided that Nichols violated policy and should be suspended for one week without pay.
The official word from FHP was that Nichols 'used deadly force by firing upon a non-threatening suspect' while also running two stop signs during the pursuit.
Nichols begins his 40-hour suspension on Friday.

http://www.baynews9.com/video?clip=http ... o_0915.flv (http://www.baynews9.com/video?clip=http://static.baynews9.com/newsvideo/bn9/web_video/Trooper_Web_Video_0915.flv)
^^Copy and paste folks^^

Are you serious? Can ANYONE justify his actions? and for a breakfast sandwich?? Me thinks you guys better stay with investigating sg3/sg4's and writing cites. :roll:

Stick to sig 3/4 huh? 'Me thinks' :roll: you should take a hike and worry about yourself and your own agency. :roll:

THE POS, SIG 3 DRIVER, KANAAN, MAGDI (2-7-88), according to public records HAS BEEN ARRESTED IN PINELLAS COUNTY 6 TIMES SINCE 2007 ALONE. He obviously stole property, F and E, and sig 3 because he is in VOP from other charges, and has no valid 27. This was not his first visit to the LE community. The following list is just from Pinellas County. His full background would probably be horrific to read. :twisted: :twisted:

For the state attorney to drop all charges against this POS is not only feckless, it is disingenuous to all LEO's and continues to confirm how incompetent the SAO is in Pinellas. For the SAO to accept anything said by Kanaan as truthful-- is despicable. If N felt like his life was in danger from the POS thief and convicted druggie and sig 2, then that's what it should have been. PERIOD. :shock: :shock:

Since we only have the tape of Trooper N's car and N's statements, and the convicted criminal's lies, I have to believe trooper N and go with "...invest concluded, no action is appropriate and none taken." FHP needs to start standing up to SAO and their whole sad sack of narcissistic staff. :x :x


CTC1007484MMANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA C 03/25/10 07/19/10 FOPF RLSD $0
Link to Case Docket CRC1005524CFANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA C 03/12/10 07/19/10 STJT PRST $0
Link to Case Docket CTC0935889MMANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA E 12/17/09 02/05/10 NINF OREC $0
Link to Case Docket CTC094152ELTANC DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA 10/11/09 12/30/09 NOLP BOND $250
Link to Case Docket CRC0922049CFANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA C 10/11/09 12/30/09 NIFF BOND $5000
Link to Case Docket CRC0922048CFANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA C 10/11/09 12/30/09 NINF BOND $5000
Link to Case Docket CTC0929529MMANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA E 10/11/09 12/30/09 NIFF BOND $250
Link to Case Docket N CTC0901641MMANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA R 01/21/09 05/07/10 STJT RLSD $0
Link to Case Docket CTC0726471MMANO DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA E 09/26/07 10/17/07 JDSE CLRK $0
Link to Case Docket N CTC064997DZLANC DEFENDANT A VS KANAAN,MA 05/08/07 06/07/07 STJT RLSD $0

The simple fact is that the SAO and FHP believed the lying perp over the trooper. Is this the kind of agency you want to work for? And people wonder why FHP has a flood of troopers waiting to get out. Just let the bad guy run you down or better yet, run the other way when someone comes up to you mentioning a crime.

If you really believe the perp didn't see the trooper behind him with lights flashing then you are an absolute moron!

The bad guy probably IS lying, but the video isn't. Even if the backing was intentional, it does not justify firing 9 rounds. And just because the bad guy has been arrested numerous times, doesn't mean you can shoot him.

I can't believe some of you guys are issued badges and guns. I guess I know what we will be reviewing at firearms and DT training.

The bad guy probably IS lying, but the video isn't. Even if the backing was intentional, it does not justify firing 9 rounds. And just because the bad guy has been arrested numerous times, doesn't mean you can shoot him.

I can't believe some of you guys are issued badges and guns. I guess I know what we will be reviewing at firearms and DT training.

You need to take a look at actual case law then. You would be amazed how limiting FHP policy is and how much it threatens your life! Many agencies do not have the "wait unil you are ran over before you shoot" mentality like FHP does.

That Trooper should be fired. That vehicle was clearly not a threat. What if one of the 9 rounds that he MISSED with would of hit an innocent bystander...a child even. I know the trooper was hungry and trying to get those bacon/egg/and cheese sandwiches but at what cost. FHP needs to stay on the highways and leave these type of incidents to the locals. I know that the cry from FHP is that the locals only handle barking dogs, domestics, and shoplifters...but look what happens when FHP gets involved in a breakfast sandwich theft...lol. Imagine FHP on a domestic...everybody would be dead..well if you guys go shoot better that is.

That Trooper should be fired. That vehicle was clearly not a threat. What if one of the 9 rounds that he MISSED with would of hit an innocent bystander...a child even. I know the trooper was hungry and trying to get those bacon/egg/and cheese sandwiches but at what cost. FHP needs to stay on the highways and leave these type of incidents to the locals. I know that the cry from FHP is that the locals only handle barking dogs, domestics, and shoplifters...but look what happens when FHP gets involved in a breakfast sandwich theft...lol. Imagine FHP on a domestic...everybody would be dead..well if you guys go shoot better that is.

Even though your grammar is so bad that it makes it difficult to understand your points, FROM WHAT I COULD UNDERSTAND, YOU ARE WRONG. I wasn't standing there and neither were you; we have no idea what the trooper's thinking covered in that split second just a few weeks after several cops had been shot in Tampa by felons who were involved in minor X-50's. IF the trooper SAID HE FELT HIS LIFE WAS IN JEPORADY, THAN THAT'S WHAT MATTERED. :idea: :idea:

You can play the "what if game" all day, but it doesn't change Nicholes' perceived fear and need to use deadly force. Little was published about what Nicholes was told to initiate the original pursuit-- was it shoplifting, armed robbery, weapon displayed to store or implied?? When the convicted criminal (6 arrests in Pinellas alone) hit the patrol car after a theft, after Tampa cops' murders, fear for his life seems logical-- if you want to believe that the convicted criminal was telling the truth, you --and the Pinellas State Attorney and the FHP investigators-- are delusional. :!:

That Trooper should be fired. That vehicle was clearly not a threat. What if one of the 9 rounds that he MISSED with would of hit an innocent bystander...a child even. I know the trooper was hungry and trying to get those bacon/egg/and cheese sandwiches but at what cost. FHP needs to stay on the highways and leave these type of incidents to the locals. I know that the cry from FHP is that the locals only handle barking dogs, domestics, and shoplifters...but look what happens when FHP gets involved in a breakfast sandwich theft...lol. Imagine FHP on a domestic...everybody would be dead..well if you guys go shoot better that is.

Even though your grammar is so bad that it makes it difficult to understand your points, FROM WHAT I COULD UNDERSTAND, YOU ARE WRONG. I wasn't standing there and neither were you; we have no idea what the trooper's thinking covered in that split second just a few weeks after several cops had been shot in Tampa by felons who were involved in minor X-50's. IF the trooper SAID HE FELT HIS LIFE WAS IN JEPORADY, THAN THAT'S WHAT MATTERED. :idea: :idea:

You can play the "what if game" all day, but it doesn't change Nicholes' perceived fear and need to use deadly force. Little was published about what Nicholes was told to initiate the original pursuit-- was it shoplifting, armed robbery, weapon displayed to store or implied?? When the convicted criminal (6 arrests in Pinellas alone) hit the patrol car after a theft, after Tampa cops' murders, fear for his life seems logical-- if you want to believe that the convicted criminal was telling the truth, you --and the Pinellas State Attorney and the FHP investigators-- are delusional. :!:


I love how you try to state that the facts are subjective. ITS ON VIDEO moron. If Nichols felt that his life was in danger based on that video and those circumstances then he is in the wrong line of work. As a LEO we must place ourselves in the way of danger and react appropriately. 9 shots at a car driving away!!!! Come on. When did he feel that he was in danger anyway? The frikkin car was 25 yards away and he is still shooting.....Anyone who tries to defend this guys actions doesn't understand real police work and would probably react the same way. Oh, and his criminal record was unknown to the trooper so NOT a factor. SAO and internal affairs has it right. Sorry Chumpo.

Everyone needs to watch the video before commenting.

http://www.baynews9.com/video?clip=http://static.baynews9.com/newsvideo/bn9/web_video/Trooper_Web_Video_0915.flv

Here's the indisputable facts according to the video.

1. The vehicle was already backing up when the tpr turned the corner..reverse lights were on.
2. The vehicle was backing into a space and the tpr exited his car and placed himself in the path of the suspect.
3. The tpr continued to fire long after the threat, if there was one, was over.
4. There were no lights or siren initiated until the suspect was out of sight of the tpr.
5. The tpr conducted a dangerous pursuit through a residential neighborhood for an egg mcmuffin.
6. After securing the suspect, the suspects vehicle was not tactically cleared before a tpr nonchalantly walks past it.
7. The tpr states that he was aiming at the tire. If he was so threatened why was he not shooting at the driver?
8. Lastly, all tpr's are fat and dumpy looking.

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

Perhaps you should go back to the academy to learn a little bit about Florida's laws. What aggravated battery did the trooper commit?

Let me educate you:

784.03 Battery; felony battery.
—
(1)(a)The offense of battery occurs when a person:
1.Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
2.Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.
(b)Except as provided in subsection (2), a person who commits battery commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2)A person who has one prior conviction for battery, aggravated battery, or felony battery and who commits any second or subsequent battery commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. For purposes of this subsection, “conviction” means a determination of guilt that is the result of a plea or a trial, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld or a plea of nolo contendere is entered.

784.045 Aggravated battery.
—
(1)(a)A person commits aggravated battery who, in committing battery:
1.Intentionally or knowingly causes great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement; or
2.Uses a deadly weapon.
(b)A person commits aggravated battery if the person who was the victim of the battery was pregnant at the time of the offense and the offender knew or should have known that the victim was pregnant.
(2)Whoever commits aggravated battery shall be guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

And you want to sit comfortably back and cast judgment on the trooper while hiding behind the anonymity of this site when you do not even know the law? Really? Can't you spend your time doing something more productive?

You are in over your head.

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

Hey, City Kitty:
You don't have even close to half of the facts, much of your statement is incorrect, and your logic is delusional. Please, don't venture out of your city limits. I gather from your suggestions, you don't believe in aggressive protection of the public, just your narcissistic self. And, before you think about a reply, check out the criminal history on the convicted fleeing felon, whom the spineless Pinellas SAO let go of all charges. :cry: :cry:

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

Hey, City Kitty:
You don't have even close to half of the facts, much of your statement is incorrect, and your logic is delusional. Please, don't venture out of your city limits. I gather from your suggestions, you don't believe in aggressive protection of the public, just your narcissistic self. And, before you think about a reply, check out the criminal history on the convicted fleeing felon, whom the spineless Pinellas SAO let go of all charges. :cry: :cry:

...and I gather from your initial statement of "City Kitty" that you are a rookie fresh out of the academy. When you get off probation, try not using academy lingo.

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

Hey, City Kitty:
You don't have even close to half of the facts, much of your statement is incorrect, and your logic is delusional. Please, don't venture out of your city limits. I gather from your suggestions, you don't believe in aggressive protection of the public, just your narcissistic self. And, before you think about a reply, check out the criminal history on the convicted fleeing felon, whom the spineless Pinellas SAO let go of all charges. :cry: :cry:

...and I gather from your initial statement of "City Kitty" that you are a rookie fresh out of the academy. When you get off probation, try not using academy lingo.

Try again, city kitty; You're making it too easy for me. I've got 23 yrs on as a LEO, currently at rank of Major, and I still try to spend some time "working the road." Sorry to destroy your delusional logic, again. Well, I have to leave the site as I have some early meetings and then, still put in a few hours on the big slab. :D :D

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

Wow way to support your fellow Leo. You are bashing him more than a crazy left wing police hating liberal. Thanks for the support. :roll:

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

Hey, City Kitty:
You don't have even close to half of the facts, much of your statement is incorrect, and your logic is delusional. Please, don't venture out of your city limits. I gather from your suggestions, you don't believe in aggressive protection of the public, just your narcissistic self. And, before you think about a reply, check out the criminal history on the convicted fleeing felon, whom the spineless Pinellas SAO let go of all charges. :cry: :cry:

good posting

I live in the immediate area where this shooting and chase happened. I work for an agency with an aggressive chase policy and we would have 10-66 this one.Driving signal 12 through a residential area where kids play. For a signal 33? Opening fire because you are in fear of your life? Yet you "Aim at the tires" There is no fear for your life with that action taken.

A week suspension for aggravated Battery? I often wonder why FHP can't get support for a raise from the legislator. Troopers who do things like this could be the reason, it might be time to disbanded and let the troopers apply with the SO offices.

My thinking is this, with the weak chase policy FHP had/has the Trooper could justify the chase if he opened fire. In al reality he should have just let the car go he had the tag on his ICV.

Let's talk officer safety, he was in a pursuit with a wanted person 10-99 in a county that is lucky to have 4 troopers 10-8 at one time. Chasing and unknown person in a residential neighborhood he doesn't know nor do most troopers. He was lucky the other Trooper got there so fast. Was his AVL on?

Was the Trooper justified in shooting at the suspect. NO, should he have engaged in a chase for a simple 33 from Hess? Hell no, had my child been out side and hurt by his action I would sue the Trooper the agency and the BG. I am sure the BG will sue FHP and the Trooper. What sucks for the Trooper he had ICV otherwise he would have gotten away with it. Then again I think he did.

There is a difference between a chase on I-75 and Westlake road.


I hope they put this guy on desk duty...

Hey, City Kitty:
You don't have even close to half of the facts, much of your statement is incorrect, and your logic is delusional. Please, don't venture out of your city limits. I gather from your suggestions, you don't believe in aggressive protection of the public, just your narcissistic self. And, before you think about a reply, check out the criminal history on the convicted fleeing felon, whom the spineless Pinellas SAO let go of all charges. :cry: :cry:

...and I gather from your initial statement of "City Kitty" that you are a rookie fresh out of the academy. When you get off probation, try not using academy lingo.

Try again, city kitty; You're making it too easy for me. I've got 23 yrs on as a LEO, currently at rank of Major, and I still try to spend some time "working the road." Sorry to destroy your delusional logic, again. Well, I have to leave the site as I have some early meetings and then, still put in a few hours on the big slab. :D :D

LOL you claim to be a FHP Major and you have to leave the site as you have some early meeting and then, still put in a few hours on the big slab?

First off your post is at 12:19 AM, as in midnight, second you wont find any Major in the state out working at midnight nor will they use a term like "The Slab"

You are a fraud.

[deltav]

Here's the indisputable facts according to the video.

1. The vehicle was already backing up when the tpr turned the corner..reverse lights were on.
2. The vehicle was backing into a space and the tpr exited his car and placed himself in the path of the suspect.
3. The tpr continued to fire long after the threat, if there was one, was over.
4. There were no lights or siren initiated until the suspect was out of sight of the tpr.
5. The tpr conducted a dangerous pursuit through a residential neighborhood for an egg mcmuffin.
6. After securing the suspect, the suspects vehicle was not tactically cleared before a tpr nonchalantly walks past it.
7. The tpr states that he was aiming at the tire. If he was so threatened why was he not shooting at the driver?
8. Lastly, all tpr's are fat and dumpy looking.

I am sorry to inform you, some of your "facts" are disputable.

(1) The reverse lights were not on when the trooper turned the corner. A close inspection of the video shows 1 second missing on the video. The time stamp on the video shows a jump from 08:04:05 to 08:04:07 when running at normal speed. If you stop the video at this time stamp and drag the slider back just a little, you can then see 08:04:06. The reverse lights are NOT on. (Running the video at normal speed CLEARLY shows it has been edited.)

[attachment=0:1aa6x2um]Capture.JPG[/attachment:1aa6x2um]


(2) The patrol car door can be heard opening BEFORE the rearward movement. I will admit, this is hard to tell because of the missing second of video. The missing second hides a lot.

(4) The troopers lights WERE on before he turned that last corner (time stamp 08:04:02). You can see the wig-wag headlights flashing in the side of the dark car.

And what have we as troop c troopers learned from this incident? It's very simple FHP won't back you up. Don't do any proactive police work that could get your butt in a sling. Just go to your calls, no X31's, and if you even think they might complain, just give a verbal warning and walk. The crap is not worth your job. And judging from the citizn comments here, the citizens of troop C don't really appreciate the dangerous work we do anyway, so who really cares. Road Rangers with a gun. I for one am not going to risk it any more. It's just not worth it if FHP is going to back down to the SAO twice now and change their investigtion decisions.

This clown kinda reminds me of Farva from Super Troopers :evil: :devil: Say car Ramrod

Try again, city kitty; You're making it too easy for me. I've got 23 yrs on as a LEO, currently at rank of Major, and I still try to spend some time "working the road." Sorry to destroy your delusional logic, again. Well, I have to leave the site as I have some early meetings and then, still put in a few hours on the big slab.

Translation: Early Meetings= Breakfast and Lunch
Few hours on the big slab= Office to "meetings", and back to office

That Trooper should be fired. That vehicle was clearly not a threat. What if one of the 9 rounds that he MISSED with would of hit an innocent bystander...a child even. I know the trooper was hungry and trying to get those bacon/egg/and cheese sandwiches but at what cost. FHP needs to stay on the highways and leave these type of incidents to the locals. I know that the cry from FHP is that the locals only handle barking dogs, domestics, and shoplifters...but look what happens when FHP gets involved in a breakfast sandwich theft...lol. Imagine FHP on a domestic...everybody would be dead..well if you guys go shoot better that is.

Even though your grammar is so bad that it makes it difficult to understand your points, FROM WHAT I COULD UNDERSTAND, YOU ARE WRONG. I wasn't standing there and neither were you; we have no idea what the trooper's thinking covered in that split second just a few weeks after several cops had been shot in Tampa by felons who were involved in minor X-50's. IF the trooper SAID HE FELT HIS LIFE WAS IN JEPORADY, THAN THAT'S WHAT MATTERED. :idea: :idea:

You can play the "what if game" all day, but it doesn't change Nicholes' perceived fear and need to use deadly force. Little was published about what Nicholes was told to initiate the original pursuit-- was it shoplifting, armed robbery, weapon displayed to store or implied?? When the convicted criminal (6 arrests in Pinellas alone) hit the patrol car after a theft, after Tampa cops' murders, fear for his life seems logical-- if you want to believe that the convicted criminal was telling the truth, you --and the Pinellas State Attorney and the FHP investigators-- are delusional. :!:

Sorry, you cannot justify this shooting for one second AFTER THE GUY DROVE AWAY. I think if he had fired AS the van was backing in his direction he would have had SOME form of justification. But he fired off every round AFTER the van drove away. That is a fleeing felon maybe. As for the SAO not filing, would you want this trooper on the stand? I wouldnt. Ive worked around this guy, he is a loose cannon and should have been fired. He is no example of a trooper, from what I have seen, he should not being in this position.

I've thought about this for several days and I've reviewed the tape numerous times. My thought on this matter is fairly straight forward and I hope I bring a new perspective to this thread.

1. The tape shows the suspect was traveling the wrong way in a parking lot to park his vehicle. Look at the tape and think how difficult it would be to try to park a vehicle unless you were backing into it and then exiting the wrong way from the parking lot. This supports the trooper's contention the suspect was in fact fleeing.

2. I've been told by other trooper's who were there the Hess manager exited the store screaming "That guy just robbed me"! This supports the trooper's position that a violent felony had just occurred. Had the trooper not taken immediate action he would have been derelict in his duty.

3. Listen to the tape and watch the tape carefully. The patrol car was stopped with camera and sound activated and you can clearly see the suspect's back up lights activate and begin backing after the FHP patrol car was stopped. You can also clearly hear the door of the patrol car open. This supports the trooper's position of being outside his patrol car when the suspect "back into". . . "NO". . .when the suspect's vehicle "rammed" the patrol car.

4. If the suspect was merely attempting to park his car why didn't he stop upon contact/ramming the patrol car? Flight is indicative of guilt. . .so says the United States Supreme Court. Why did the suspect flee? What did the trooper say to the suspect? The trooper's warnings are all on tape.

5. I've checked the record and the case was dismissed at the request of the Florida Highway Patrol Bureau of Investigations. Not on the SAO's.

6. The disciplinary action taken against the trooper appears to violate FSS 112.532.
When a Government entity, The Florida Highway Patrol, has to violate the clarity of a state statue to punish a LEO or citizen. . .we are all in trouble.

7. Based upon my own research and everything I've read about this incident the government, FHP, has made some serious error's in judgement.

8. As for the Lt. (Collins) who stated your story doesn't match the video let's hope it doesn't. When witnesses and statements match exactly what has transpired even I become a little suspcious.

I hope the trooper files a law suit so the entire truth can come out on both sides. I will be waiting and reading. Good luck to the trooper.

And what have we as troop c troopers learned from this incident? It's very simple FHP won't back you up. Don't do any proactive police work that could get your butt in a sling. Just go to your calls, no X31's, and if you even think they might complain, just give a verbal warning and walk. The crap is not worth your job. And judging from the citizn comments here, the citizens of troop C don't really appreciate the dangerous work we do anyway, so who really cares. Road Rangers with a gun. I for one am not going to risk it any more. It's just not worth it if FHP is going to back down to the SAO twice now and change their investigtion decisions.

Exactly what I was thinking when I read about this story. There is no way this department is going back you when the sh1t hits the fan. FHP is looking out for the best interest of FHP. Any trooper who thinks the department will back you has another thing coming; they will hang your ass out to dry!

No way in hell would I get into any chase now (or any other action that could be deemed questionable). Someone flees from a traffic stop, fine. I'm turning off my lights and not even calling it in. If FHP doesn't want us to be the police, then I won't be the police. I'll help change tires and work wrecks all day. I don't care either way....my paycheck will be the same sh1tty amount regardless of what I do. :devil:

And what have we as troop c troopers learned from this incident? It's very simple FHP won't back you up. Don't do any proactive police work that could get your butt in a sling. Just go to your calls, no X31's, and if you even think they might complain, just give a verbal warning and walk. The crap is not worth your job. And judging from the citizn comments here, the citizens of troop C don't really appreciate the dangerous work we do anyway, so who really cares. Road Rangers with a gun. I for one am not going to risk it any more. It's just not worth it if FHP is going to back down to the SAO twice now and change their investigtion decisions.

Exactly what I was thinking when I read about this story. There is no way this department is going back you when the sh1t hits the fan. FHP is looking out for the best interest of FHP. Any trooper who thinks the department will back you has another thing coming; they will hang your ass out to dry!

No way in hell would I get into any chase now (or any other action that could be deemed questionable). Someone flees from a traffic stop, fine. I'm turning off my lights and not even calling it in. If FHP doesn't want us to be the police, then I won't be the police. I'll help change tires and work wrecks all day. I don't care either way....my paycheck will be the same sh1tty amount regardless of what I do. :devil:

AMEN!!

I would worry any time the BOI took a look at anything. Lt. C was a counselor when I went through and personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable with him investigating a barking dog call. There are several others that would have a hard time counting to 100 by 5's, how could you trust them to conduct a thorough investigation?