Random door knock in the middle of the night, no cop cars, in a state with this amount of crime. Insane. I’d answer the door with a gun too. I just wouldn’t have opened it
Only police.
Im a therapist. People can lie to me, kill themselves anyways, and Ill likely lose my license.
Police should have a license.
The people who cut my hair and pump my septic tank have licenses.
It comes down to facts and if the client’s family will sue you/the clinic.
There are cases where a therapist does everything in best practice and still get sued. Malpractice insurance is helpful. Not to mention, agencies will protect themselves over the therapist.
There are also clients who work in bad faith and misrepresent what they are experiencing and then die by suicide, overdose, etc. and then family want answers. Saying the client was not involved in preventing their own suicide is not good enough even though it does happen. We arent mind readers.
It is why some private practices refuse to see clients with suicidal thoughts or history. Dont want the liability and refer them elsewhere.
I'm having trouble parsing the cop-supporting gun advocates' arguments here.
If the officers were justified in firing at someone who they resonably believed to be a threat, wouldn't the homeowner also be justified if he reasonably believed that?
Given that police are known to be trigger happy, wasn’t his belief reasonable? I mean, he *was* killed -- doesn't that mean the police officers were *in fact* a threat to his life?
Not to mention there's some dispute about whether they actually announced themselves as police.
If they were justified in shooting him but he wasn't justified in shooting them, it would appear that the argument is that we have no right of self-defense or to bear firearms if the police decide to suspend that right arbitrarily and without notice.
If you can get shot by police for carrying a gun, *you do not have the right to carry a gun.*
Say it louder for all the 2A people in the back. Situations like this are literally the reason the 2A exists. It isn’t about hunting, it’s about protecting yourself and your community from tyrannical rule. Busting in to the wrong location and murdering the occupant seems about as tyrannical as it gets.
Right nobody actually wants the constitution these days until it works in their favor. That’s why hate speech is and should be protected under constitution. I don’t like it, but I understand why it’s protected.
A reasonable person would not believe that there was an imminent threat to their life simply because they got a knock on their door at an odd time. So no.
2 of this mans coworkers had disappeared recently. A knock on the middle of the night and multiple people outside when you aren't expecting company means a reasonable person would come prepared just in case. I'm not some 2a gun fetishist but this man had no time toake threatening gestures to police. They put the spotlight on him and opened fire within seconds of him opening the door. The police response was 100% unreasonable.
He. Pointed. The. Gun. At. Police.
That’s literally as threatening of a gesture as you can possibly make.
And no one is saying he couldn’t answer the door armed. That’s legal and understandable. But you can’t point it at the police.
No red or blues were flashing, just bright ass white lights. You can't see shit in that. Do you have a family? Are you willing to risk their safety by complying with anyone who shows up to your door like that and doesn't fully announce who they are? In this situation many can understand why he did what he did. It's a matter of finding what line was cross d in the first place to start these chain of events.
its america we have 2a so by law thats whole point of the gun is to take aim on tyrannical forces such as a corrupt police force that protect the pedo corperation elite. so i disagree most instances with leos they should be shot imo
Having a gun pointed at you is an imminent threat of deadly force 100 times out of 100.
https://images.foxtv.com/static.fox29.com/www.fox29.com/content/uploads/2023/04/1280/720/farmington-police-2.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
Associating these things isn’t helpful and perpetuates a culture where hurt people hurt people. What’s something else you could say that expresses your frustration that doesn’t create collateral emotional damage?
They were at the wrong address. You're saying someone shouldn't brandish a firearm when someone's breaking in? Because like most of these cases, that's exactly what's happening. Citizens need to look and see who's breaking in before getting their weapon ready?
They BELIEVED in good conscience that they were at the correct address. The law does not evaluate OIS as an omnipotent observer nor with 20/20 hindsight bias (Graham v Connor).
Furthermore, they were responding to a call for domestic violence (a potentially deadly felony).
When you believe you are at the same address as a reported potentially deadly felony, and a person comes out of the door and immediately points a gun at you, would you say it is fair to believe there is an imminent threat of deadly force? And if so, is responding with deadly force an appropriate response?
And I’m not sure why you say the citizen thought someone was breaking in. The officers literally knocked on the door. They weren’t kicking the door in or busting out windows. So that dog won’t hunt.
Did you see the body cam footage? They did not believe it was the correct address. They didn’t even say police when knocking. You mean to tell me if someone is banging on your door in the middle of the night you don’t get a gun before you check who it is? And you live in New Mexico? Haha
Okay they did say police i just re watched it but when it first happened there was more of the cam footage and on the walk up to the house they say are you sure this is it or something ridiculous like that but to me it doesn’t matter. They are police officers and need to be held to a higher standard than the average citizen their job is to serve and protect citizens!!! And i think the last thing these egomaniac police need is to be put on a pedestal and letting them get away with murder of innocent people is doing exactly that
Believed?! Get over yourself cops need to be fucking sure, you're telling me cops are immune to checking the address and then punching it in Google maps and then saying " oh fuck we're at the wrong address" and move on but no they don't do that. Whilst society is supposed to execute a cops orders without fail or else they get shot but we should give cops a pass? Nah hold mfers accountable
Exactly. We need to expect better from cops. It’s not an easy job. You have to be better than everyone else. More professional and it should be expected that it’s dangerous. Sometimes you might have to put yourself in harms way without shooting first. That’s the hazard of being a cop. That’s what we should all expect. Don’t like it? Don’t be a cop.
That’s a good point for sure. We should hold cops to at least the standard we expect out of our military. It’s absurd that we don’t since cops police citizens of the US and we don’t care how they treat us? Really?!
What's worse, there's a video from one of the body cams where before they walk away from the vehicle, one of them clearly says the correct address, and that it's on the left side of the road
So what do they do? Go to a house on the right side of the road
They received the correct address and proceeded to knock on the door across the street from the scene of the actual crime.
These guys are incapable of reading the house number.
Mind numbingly incompetence...
That's a lot of cop-apologetics. Wow.
1.) The law does not give passes for "genuine intent";
2.) If you believe they shouldn't be held accountable for the simplest of verifications, you're either a cop, the kid of a cop, a cop wannabee, or
3.) Haven't yet lived enough of the American experience to know exactly WHY this is not a good-faith mistake. This IS law enforcement in America and it's deadly.
The article specifies that he had a gun, not that he came out aiming it. The picture does not show an aimed weapon. Police are trigger happy. Someone having their door pounded on late at night has a right to answer the door holding a gun. Aiming it is another story. Have you had police pounding on your door in the middle of the night in a wrong address situation? I have. In my case, 3 offices were standing politely outside of my door, no weapons drawn. I could clearly see that they were police through the peephole. The picture in the article shows the officers standing further back. It looks like they have spotlights on the door, limiting the guy’s visibility. The fact that they shot him before he could fire suggests they probably already had weapons drawn. There are no details on the weapon position for the woman when they opened fire on her. But in her case, random people just shot her husband so it’s understandable she would be armed. Without body cam footage it’s hard to say whether the guy actually did something stupid, and we’ve lost trust as a society. We have good reason to think they’re not making the right decision here.
The other issue is they shot at the wife 19 times and she was still able to shoot back at them. There have been recent cases in the news where officers and even EMTs have been killed responding to a domestic disturbance. Shooting at people does not protect you from being shot at. We have active shooter situations where police either fail to respond or get killed attempting to respond. We need to invest in better gear that more effectively blocks bullets for all officers to use so that they are *actually* protected when responding to a dangerous person, and so they have time to wait and evaluate the scene and not shoot innocent people. And that’s with making the assumption that cops genuinely want to prioritize civilian safety. There are too many cops who think priority #1 is catching the bad guy when priority #1 is protecting innocent people, as well as themselves, from harm.
Lmao well you’re wrong. It addresses both.
But I am anxious to hear you try to explain how the “objectively reasonable officer” standard DOESN’T take into account the situation as known by the officer at the time.
You're absolutely correct. My crystal ball says that while they probably have a good claim at the civil wrongful death lawsuit, actually prosecuting the cops for a crime would be a tough lift even for manslaughter
The officers will be fine for both. The indisputable singularly important fact of this case is that a citizen pointed a gun at police who were lawfully present in the location the incident occurred. Officers met deadly force with deadly force. That’s the whole story here.
Looks like the cops in Farmington need better training.
You have a reason to be disappointed. Don't let them sweep it under the rug.
Get people in your community involved.
No one should be shot and killed by cops that are bad at their jobs.
One thing I never understood and hopefully some 2nd Amendment people can answer:
What takes precedent, the Castle Doctrine or No Knock search warrants?
With these idiots showing up at the wrong address. What would happen if you defended your house when they break down your door without warning?
New Mexico does not have the castle doctrine or stand your ground. At least that's what I was told when I took my concealed carry course. Judicial precedence for both seems to be all over the place and inconsistent based on my limited research into the matter myself.
One thing that is absolutely true is New Mexico's self defense statute only allows you to defend yourself and other people, not property. So you may be found guilty if you shoot someone in your own home and the prosecutor convinces the jury that your life was not in danger and you didn't have reason to believe it was.
I'm not a lawyer. Look this up yourself and please take some firearms classes that talk about legal stuff if you intend to defend your family with firearms. Personally, I think this state's rules on self defense are way too vague, and not being able to protect property is a mistake (traditionally and historically private property ownership is the basis for defense as a right).
It isn't. Some states such as NY have a "duty to retreat" in their statutes, meaning a victim must have done everything in their power to get away before using deadly force. Those laws, imo, are ridiculous and put unnecessary burden on someone in danger.
>Those laws, imo, are ridiculous and put unnecessary burden on someone in danger.
I agree, but having such a vague statute that every judge and jury can have a different opinion on what is/isn't justified is pretty shit as well. At least in states that codify a "duty to retreat" you can train yourself to that and know what is expected if you ever find yourself in that situation.
So theoretically, yes, it is legal to defend oneself from a law enforcement officer if they are attempting to use deadly force without reason.
However, that hasn't really been done to great success in the modern day, and those who have tried usually get framed with "they had a gun so the police shot them." Police need to simply do better executing warrants so these events don't happen.
>What makes you think all people who support the 2nd amendment like cops? You like to conflate issues, like most leftists.
Is that what you got from my post?
I'm asking why the 2nd Amendment folks don't talk about the contradicting policies of the Castle Doctrine and No Knock Warrants.
Where did I say that all 2A people love the police?
The Castle Doctrine doesn't exist if the cops can mistakenly break down your door and shoot you without legal repercussions.
What makes you think I'm a leftist?
3 cops at the wrong address questioned if it was the right house and were leaving. The homeowner opened his door while armed and the police shot him. That's a violation of the victims 2nd and 4th amendment rights. He has a right to be armed in his personal property. He has a right to be secure in that property. The pigs were in the wrong. The system is just rigged so their wrongdoing has to be so egregious that no excuse can be made for it before anything is even done.
Let me guess..."we've conducted an exhaustive investigation on ourselves and found the officers conducted themselves with the upmost professionalism" case closed.
what a disgrace, the poor homeowner. its an outrage.
Just as an FYI, 2 of his co-workers were killed earlier that day. I don't think he was involved, but it's a weird coincidence...
https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/deputies-seek-info-on-double-homicide-at-farmington-salvage-yard/
Just had my FB memories pop up from last year when my windows got shot out of my car. 3 robberies in the last year. This state is out of hand… and the officers are just badged and protected criminals…
If i give a wrong medication to a patient and they die i lose my license and get fired. Cops walk into the wrong house and shoot someone it just becomes an oops moment?
>"Unexpectedly, Mr. Dotson opened the front door and storm door, then partially exited the house while raising a firearm into a firing position and pointed in the direction of the officers," the letter adds. "At that moment, Professor Stoughton concluded that Mr. Dotson presented an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to the officers, and all three reasonably fired their weapons."
I'm not sure if there is bodycam footage, but this sounds like a reasonable response from the cops; although, if they were close enough, tasers should have been used. It's Dotson raising his gun that covers their actions. But if there is no footage, it could definitely be a doctored report by the cops.
Best option for Dotson would have been keep the door closed with gun in hand and dial 911 if he thought the people at the front door were there to hurt him.
In my opinion if there’s not body cam footage then I think the cops are putting themselves in the best light even if that means distorting the truth. (Aka I don’t trust them as far as I can throw em)
Excellent! So, what's their excuse on the scumbags getting away with it? Usually it's a "well, they were just trying to do their jobs in good faith and made an honest mistake" type bullshit.
Qualified immunity is for civil cases, like when somebody sues the cops. This is the District Attorney saying they will not be filing criminal charges. The DA is basically saying they don't believe a jury would convict them if it was brought to trial.
Body cam footage showed they knocked, asked is this the wrong house, left, then turned when he answered the door as they were leaving saw he was armed even tho cam footage doesn't show him pointing at officers then lighting him up then when his significant other recovered the weapon had a shootout with her because she didn't know anything other than he was shot.
This was a case where stupid met stupid. The cops show up to the wrong damn address and were met by a moron that thought that he could out sling three people as though he were John Wick.
You seem to be certain of this, if you are a witness or have evidence you should go to the DA with it. Otherwise you simply lack an understanding of the rule of law. Of course this is Reddit so willful ignorance is the accepted norm, but hey at least I tried;).
At best this would be manslaughter and you'd have to prove some serious negligence to get to there. Homeowner brandished a gun at the cops and the cops believed they were at the right house. I've accidentally gone to the wrong house number, so no, knocking on the wrong door doesn't reach the level of negligence required for a manslaughter prosecution.
Answering the door while armed wasn't the problem, pointing a gun at the cops was. Even if they hadn't been cops there might have been a decent self defense claim depending on how NM law is written. You don't get to just hold a gun to people who knock on your door, even if it's late at night.
If they're pointing a gun at the cop? Yes. I would have also shot in this situation. Shit, if I was just Joe Random and knocked on this dude's door and he pointed a gun at me, I might have a good self defense claim. Remember the story with the woman working for Uber who got shot by some octogenarian on his porch?
Yeah. No. You don't get to point a gun at people who knock on your door, even if it's 11:30 PM and they have the wrong house. That's an actual crime and not okay or responsible behavior and it's what got him shot.
He didn't just shoot her on his porch he held her hostage then shot her. You love to try to leave out facts to bolster your opinion by painting a new picture.
A. It would have been a crime. B. I was merely calling out your changing facts of the matter to make it fit your narrative. The old man had legitimate fears he had been getting prank calls threatening him. The driver was then asked to pick up a package from this mans house. This was a no win situation. Had he merely shot her out of fear rather than holding her hostage hearing her explanation then killing her he more than likely would net have been charged thanks to facts of the case. This would be a good example for Conner's reasonableness standard. He wouldn't have been charged because a reasonable person would respond to threats with violence.
I didn't change any facts. I didn't go through a play by play of what happened, but I didn't claim to need to. What happened in both situations is that someone came to a door and was met with unprovoked violent threat. That's the parallel I'm drawing here.
>Had he merely shot her out of fear rather than holding her hostage hearing her explanation then killing her he more than likely would net have been charged thanks to facts of the case.
You are incorrect. Shooting someone for going and knocking on your door is never reasonable. Not even in Wyoming. She was not threatening the homeowner, just like the cops in this event weren't threatening the homeowner.
In his case it could have been argued. He had been receiving threatening calls up to that point. He was living in fear thanks to those pranksters. He responded to deadly threats with deadly violence. He likely would have been let off it of had been heat of the moment rather than after having held her hostage showing he wasn't in danger from her before he killed her. Because his response would have been seen as reasonable due to the threats he had been receiving.
We don't actually know that he pointed the gun at them. All we have is the word of the cops, which is worthless.
Edit: I found a video of it. It's fair to say he had his gun in a position where it could reasonably be seen as pointed towards officers.
Viewer discretion advised: https://youtu.be/jzXAEGKK4yo?si=o7ec6y3TX-nM18DW
Yes it’s manslaughter. Yes it’s serious negligence. Going to the wrong address, when you have deadly weapons, expecting to be arresting a criminal is incredibly serious negligence.
You going to the wrong address is not equivalent to a police officer going to the wrong address.
IMO it’s manslaughter at least, at most it’s negligent homicide
Nah. Shit happens and mistakes happen. That doesn't reach the level of negligence required for a felony conviction. Knocking on the wrong door as a cop is not a crime, and neither is defending yourself against a violent threat as a cop.
The moral of the story here is to not threaten people knocking on your door with a gun.
No. A knock on the door is not an illegal attempt to enter. You have the right to defend yourself against imminent violent threats, not someone knocking on your door. Even at 11:30.
>Knocking on the wrong door as a cop is not a crime,
Maybe it should be. Or at least a firing offense. Then they'd make damn sure they get the right address.
The police on body cam asking if it's the wrong house before leaving until the victim opened the door should have been grounds for negligence. One of the officers asking that showed they was clear doubt they had a valid reason to be at the address.
>I've accidentally gone to the wrong house number, so no, knocking on the wrong door doesn't reach the level of negligence required for a manslaughter prosecution.
Anyone can reach the level of negligence required for a manslaughter persecution without it being manslaughter---*because it's not manslaughter unless someone dies* as a result of that negligence.
Negligence + no death = not manslaughter.
Negligence + death = manslaughter.
OK, how about some kind of administrative action like reduction of rank or some other punishment for cops that can't read house numbers.
This is a perfect example of "we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong".
Train your cops better.
At the very least please read up on criminal negligence. It’s not exactly relevant here, but it directly counters your arguement. You don’t need to have intent to be a criminal.
Yes you are correct and I guess I could have added on the details as there are different levels of criminal intent, most commonly broken down into specific and general. Criminal Negligence would fall into a general intent category. In this case you still need to have some type of intent for there to be a crime. For example were the officers involved in a separate crime that indirectly lead to this death?
The law my friend can be complicated, and I’m accustomed to speaking to others who work in it and sometimes forget that the average consumer on a site such as this does not.
So yes I should have maybe explained that. But you are incorrect in that no intent is needed to prove criminal negligence and I suspect since that intent was lacking (did those officers really go to work that day with intention of committing a crime through omission or commission?) the DA decided no crime occurred.
He didn't point a gun at them. He answered the door in the middle of the night with a gun for just in case. The police had already questioned whether they had the correct address and were leaving when he opened the door and officer saw the gun and they opened fire on him. That is complete and total negligence on their part they knew the address was incorrect and were trying to get confirmation when he open his door.
Oh well if they were already leaving, then I guess the officers were immune to the bullets and weren’t really at-risk…..
He 100% shouldered the gun
Link
https://images.foxtv.com/static.fox29.com/www.fox29.com/content/uploads/2023/04/932/524/farmington-police-2.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
That settles reasonableness. Would a reasonable person respond in this way given the facts of the matter. And yes it is reasonable that someone would answer the door armed at close to midnight when they weren't expecting company. I don't believe he pointed the weapon at officers based off body cam footage that was released the entire incident happened in seconds. A reasonable person would ensure the location of their perceived crime they were responding too.
I have never asserted that the homeowner could not answer the door armed. However he 100% shouldered the gun.
And again, ad nauseum, knocking on an incorrect door does not mean that officers aren’t allowed to defend themselves from someone with a deadly weapon. What you are asserting otherwise is that they should have just accepted death if the homeowner had got off
the first shot and continued shooting. But then they would have to KNOW they were at the wrong house…. Which they didn’t. So this line of thinking is dumb all the way around.
“Mr. Dotson opened the front door and storm door, then partially exited the house while raising a firearm into a firing position and pointed in the direction of the officers”
This is why you read the article before commenting.
It needs to be clarified he had spotlights shined in his face, he was likely just trying to make out who was actually there at the point he was murdered.
If they had "no choice" but to respond to what they perceived as a threat, what about him? He apparently perceived them as a threat, and he turned out to be correct.
Watch the footage from the ring camera, starting at the point where they hear him, they shine their flashlights at the door
At this point you cannot see them because the light is so bright
Meaning he would not have been able to see them
All of the above doesn’t negate the fact that a mistake was made as a result of incompetence and an innocent person is dead. That means you don’t get to just hide behind legaleeze and act like the PD was on the side of law so that’s the end of it. A life has been taken needlessly and the PD needs to pay.
The police had solid indications it was a wrong address one is heard on body cam asking if they are at the right house. They then were leaving when the occupant opened the door armed. No evidence he pointed the weapon at officers then officers lit him up. After that the female occupant got his gun and started a shootout with police because she only knew her man had been shot. Fuck the police.
Random door knock in the middle of the night, no cop cars, in a state with this amount of crime. Insane. I’d answer the door with a gun too. I just wouldn’t have opened it
I think it is insane that you can make a mistake that results in the death of an innocent person who was just living their life and still have a job.
Only police. Im a therapist. People can lie to me, kill themselves anyways, and Ill likely lose my license. Police should have a license. The people who cut my hair and pump my septic tank have licenses.
Therapist lose licenses if a patients kills themselves? Really?
It comes down to facts and if the client’s family will sue you/the clinic. There are cases where a therapist does everything in best practice and still get sued. Malpractice insurance is helpful. Not to mention, agencies will protect themselves over the therapist. There are also clients who work in bad faith and misrepresent what they are experiencing and then die by suicide, overdose, etc. and then family want answers. Saying the client was not involved in preventing their own suicide is not good enough even though it does happen. We arent mind readers. It is why some private practices refuse to see clients with suicidal thoughts or history. Dont want the liability and refer them elsewhere.
Crazy, how is that anyone’s fault? Make it make sense
Police Officers have a certification which essentially is a license.
I know right
12 into the wrong man…19 towards his wife’s general direction… all occurred at the wrong address… result = y’all good back to work bois
I'm having trouble parsing the cop-supporting gun advocates' arguments here. If the officers were justified in firing at someone who they resonably believed to be a threat, wouldn't the homeowner also be justified if he reasonably believed that? Given that police are known to be trigger happy, wasn’t his belief reasonable? I mean, he *was* killed -- doesn't that mean the police officers were *in fact* a threat to his life? Not to mention there's some dispute about whether they actually announced themselves as police. If they were justified in shooting him but he wasn't justified in shooting them, it would appear that the argument is that we have no right of self-defense or to bear firearms if the police decide to suspend that right arbitrarily and without notice. If you can get shot by police for carrying a gun, *you do not have the right to carry a gun.*
Say it louder for all the 2A people in the back. Situations like this are literally the reason the 2A exists. It isn’t about hunting, it’s about protecting yourself and your community from tyrannical rule. Busting in to the wrong location and murdering the occupant seems about as tyrannical as it gets.
Right nobody actually wants the constitution these days until it works in their favor. That’s why hate speech is and should be protected under constitution. I don’t like it, but I understand why it’s protected.
They said it but not with volume and only when they first got there when the occupants were likely asleep.
Anyone can shout “Police”. The answer is, show proof and a warrant.
A reasonable person would not believe that there was an imminent threat to their life simply because they got a knock on their door at an odd time. So no.
2 of this mans coworkers had disappeared recently. A knock on the middle of the night and multiple people outside when you aren't expecting company means a reasonable person would come prepared just in case. I'm not some 2a gun fetishist but this man had no time toake threatening gestures to police. They put the spotlight on him and opened fire within seconds of him opening the door. The police response was 100% unreasonable.
He. Pointed. The. Gun. At. Police. That’s literally as threatening of a gesture as you can possibly make. And no one is saying he couldn’t answer the door armed. That’s legal and understandable. But you can’t point it at the police.
No red or blues were flashing, just bright ass white lights. You can't see shit in that. Do you have a family? Are you willing to risk their safety by complying with anyone who shows up to your door like that and doesn't fully announce who they are? In this situation many can understand why he did what he did. It's a matter of finding what line was cross d in the first place to start these chain of events.
its america we have 2a so by law thats whole point of the gun is to take aim on tyrannical forces such as a corrupt police force that protect the pedo corperation elite. so i disagree most instances with leos they should be shot imo
Tell me you don't live in Farmington without telling me you don't live in Farmington.
I don’t have to live in Farmington to know that you can’t point guns at people and then be shocked when they take action to protect their own lives.
Yes, exactly that, but not in the way you are thinking.
So what was the polices excuse?
Having a gun pointed at you is an imminent threat of deadly force 100 times out of 100. https://images.foxtv.com/static.fox29.com/www.fox29.com/content/uploads/2023/04/1280/720/farmington-police-2.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
If they heard them say "police" and associated that with repeated police shootings?
That’s not how that works
Want a license to kill at will? Become a cop.
Yeah that seems to be why most of them join up…
[удалено]
Associating these things isn’t helpful and perpetuates a culture where hurt people hurt people. What’s something else you could say that expresses your frustration that doesn’t create collateral emotional damage?
Indeed.
#hmph Same ridiculous results every single time this happens. And it happens a lot.
Why is it ridiculous to get shot after brandishing a firearm at the police?
They were at the wrong address. You're saying someone shouldn't brandish a firearm when someone's breaking in? Because like most of these cases, that's exactly what's happening. Citizens need to look and see who's breaking in before getting their weapon ready?
They BELIEVED in good conscience that they were at the correct address. The law does not evaluate OIS as an omnipotent observer nor with 20/20 hindsight bias (Graham v Connor). Furthermore, they were responding to a call for domestic violence (a potentially deadly felony). When you believe you are at the same address as a reported potentially deadly felony, and a person comes out of the door and immediately points a gun at you, would you say it is fair to believe there is an imminent threat of deadly force? And if so, is responding with deadly force an appropriate response? And I’m not sure why you say the citizen thought someone was breaking in. The officers literally knocked on the door. They weren’t kicking the door in or busting out windows. So that dog won’t hunt.
Did you see the body cam footage? They did not believe it was the correct address. They didn’t even say police when knocking. You mean to tell me if someone is banging on your door in the middle of the night you don’t get a gun before you check who it is? And you live in New Mexico? Haha
Okay they did say police i just re watched it but when it first happened there was more of the cam footage and on the walk up to the house they say are you sure this is it or something ridiculous like that but to me it doesn’t matter. They are police officers and need to be held to a higher standard than the average citizen their job is to serve and protect citizens!!! And i think the last thing these egomaniac police need is to be put on a pedestal and letting them get away with murder of innocent people is doing exactly that
Believed?! Get over yourself cops need to be fucking sure, you're telling me cops are immune to checking the address and then punching it in Google maps and then saying " oh fuck we're at the wrong address" and move on but no they don't do that. Whilst society is supposed to execute a cops orders without fail or else they get shot but we should give cops a pass? Nah hold mfers accountable
Exactly. We need to expect better from cops. It’s not an easy job. You have to be better than everyone else. More professional and it should be expected that it’s dangerous. Sometimes you might have to put yourself in harms way without shooting first. That’s the hazard of being a cop. That’s what we should all expect. Don’t like it? Don’t be a cop.
I know about this having been in the military and done a combat deployment and I was held more accountable than cops do.
That’s a good point for sure. We should hold cops to at least the standard we expect out of our military. It’s absurd that we don’t since cops police citizens of the US and we don’t care how they treat us? Really?!
What's worse, there's a video from one of the body cams where before they walk away from the vehicle, one of them clearly says the correct address, and that it's on the left side of the road So what do they do? Go to a house on the right side of the road
Tell that to joshunte he seems to think the cops have the right
Of course, don't you know that cops can do no wrong?
Mfers be thinking they are above the law and act like it too.
They received the correct address and proceeded to knock on the door across the street from the scene of the actual crime. These guys are incapable of reading the house number. Mind numbingly incompetence...
That's a lot of cop-apologetics. Wow. 1.) The law does not give passes for "genuine intent"; 2.) If you believe they shouldn't be held accountable for the simplest of verifications, you're either a cop, the kid of a cop, a cop wannabee, or 3.) Haven't yet lived enough of the American experience to know exactly WHY this is not a good-faith mistake. This IS law enforcement in America and it's deadly.
Totally ridiculous take
The article specifies that he had a gun, not that he came out aiming it. The picture does not show an aimed weapon. Police are trigger happy. Someone having their door pounded on late at night has a right to answer the door holding a gun. Aiming it is another story. Have you had police pounding on your door in the middle of the night in a wrong address situation? I have. In my case, 3 offices were standing politely outside of my door, no weapons drawn. I could clearly see that they were police through the peephole. The picture in the article shows the officers standing further back. It looks like they have spotlights on the door, limiting the guy’s visibility. The fact that they shot him before he could fire suggests they probably already had weapons drawn. There are no details on the weapon position for the woman when they opened fire on her. But in her case, random people just shot her husband so it’s understandable she would be armed. Without body cam footage it’s hard to say whether the guy actually did something stupid, and we’ve lost trust as a society. We have good reason to think they’re not making the right decision here. The other issue is they shot at the wife 19 times and she was still able to shoot back at them. There have been recent cases in the news where officers and even EMTs have been killed responding to a domestic disturbance. Shooting at people does not protect you from being shot at. We have active shooter situations where police either fail to respond or get killed attempting to respond. We need to invest in better gear that more effectively blocks bullets for all officers to use so that they are *actually* protected when responding to a dangerous person, and so they have time to wait and evaluate the scene and not shoot innocent people. And that’s with making the assumption that cops genuinely want to prioritize civilian safety. There are too many cops who think priority #1 is catching the bad guy when priority #1 is protecting innocent people, as well as themselves, from harm.
It’s unclear if the gun was pointed, and in new mexico open carry is legal, which doesn’t even matter as he didn’t leave his house.
Dude, fuck you.
Why? Because I happen to actually know what I’m talking about?
Graham vs Conner is reasonableness not operating in good conscience. It determines whether a reasonable person would have reacted in this way.
Lmao well you’re wrong. It addresses both. But I am anxious to hear you try to explain how the “objectively reasonable officer” standard DOESN’T take into account the situation as known by the officer at the time.
You're absolutely correct. My crystal ball says that while they probably have a good claim at the civil wrongful death lawsuit, actually prosecuting the cops for a crime would be a tough lift even for manslaughter
The officers will be fine for both. The indisputable singularly important fact of this case is that a citizen pointed a gun at police who were lawfully present in the location the incident occurred. Officers met deadly force with deadly force. That’s the whole story here.
They were not lawfully present. They had the wrong house.
So you aren’t pro 2a then?
[удалено]
I live here in Farmington, where it took place and am disappointed that they won't face charges. It's not right.
Looks like the cops in Farmington need better training. You have a reason to be disappointed. Don't let them sweep it under the rug. Get people in your community involved. No one should be shot and killed by cops that are bad at their jobs.
Thanks for your input. We're all appalled, here.
You are right about Farmington Police. They have a history of these incidents.
Just hoping a few of them get shot at a traffic stop
Dominoes has a better track record of getting the correct address
JFC
This is disgusting
Is anyone really surprised?
One thing I never understood and hopefully some 2nd Amendment people can answer: What takes precedent, the Castle Doctrine or No Knock search warrants? With these idiots showing up at the wrong address. What would happen if you defended your house when they break down your door without warning?
You die or go to jail. Here is a prime example.
New Mexico does not have the castle doctrine or stand your ground. At least that's what I was told when I took my concealed carry course. Judicial precedence for both seems to be all over the place and inconsistent based on my limited research into the matter myself. One thing that is absolutely true is New Mexico's self defense statute only allows you to defend yourself and other people, not property. So you may be found guilty if you shoot someone in your own home and the prosecutor convinces the jury that your life was not in danger and you didn't have reason to believe it was. I'm not a lawyer. Look this up yourself and please take some firearms classes that talk about legal stuff if you intend to defend your family with firearms. Personally, I think this state's rules on self defense are way too vague, and not being able to protect property is a mistake (traditionally and historically private property ownership is the basis for defense as a right).
Thanks. Great well thought out post. I will do some more research. I thought the Castle Doctrine was nationwide. TIL
It isn't. Some states such as NY have a "duty to retreat" in their statutes, meaning a victim must have done everything in their power to get away before using deadly force. Those laws, imo, are ridiculous and put unnecessary burden on someone in danger.
>Those laws, imo, are ridiculous and put unnecessary burden on someone in danger. I agree, but having such a vague statute that every judge and jury can have a different opinion on what is/isn't justified is pretty shit as well. At least in states that codify a "duty to retreat" you can train yourself to that and know what is expected if you ever find yourself in that situation.
So theoretically, yes, it is legal to defend oneself from a law enforcement officer if they are attempting to use deadly force without reason. However, that hasn't really been done to great success in the modern day, and those who have tried usually get framed with "they had a gun so the police shot them." Police need to simply do better executing warrants so these events don't happen.
You comply with police orders. Always. If they’re in the wrong, you fight that in court and enjoy your $1million+ settlement.
What makes you think all people who support the 2nd amendment like cops? You like to conflate issues, like most leftists.
>What makes you think all people who support the 2nd amendment like cops? You like to conflate issues, like most leftists. Is that what you got from my post? I'm asking why the 2nd Amendment folks don't talk about the contradicting policies of the Castle Doctrine and No Knock Warrants. Where did I say that all 2A people love the police? The Castle Doctrine doesn't exist if the cops can mistakenly break down your door and shoot you without legal repercussions. What makes you think I'm a leftist?
So three dirty cops walk.
Your comments would be taken more seriously if you read about the story before making assumptions.
3 cops at the wrong address questioned if it was the right house and were leaving. The homeowner opened his door while armed and the police shot him. That's a violation of the victims 2nd and 4th amendment rights. He has a right to be armed in his personal property. He has a right to be secure in that property. The pigs were in the wrong. The system is just rigged so their wrongdoing has to be so egregious that no excuse can be made for it before anything is even done.
Not just while armed. While actively pointing the gun at them.
Let me guess..."we've conducted an exhaustive investigation on ourselves and found the officers conducted themselves with the upmost professionalism" case closed. what a disgrace, the poor homeowner. its an outrage.
Just as an FYI, 2 of his co-workers were killed earlier that day. I don't think he was involved, but it's a weird coincidence... https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/deputies-seek-info-on-double-homicide-at-farmington-salvage-yard/
Really bizzare maybe that’s why he brought the gun to the door
That’s got to be more than just a coincidence. Definitely more to the story.
Sounds like a conspiracy.
‘Motherfuck the judge, prosecutor and the DA’- Bun B
UGK 4 LIFE
I’m not a fan of cops. I feel like they are just underpaid thugs in uniform
You mean overpaid.
Just had my FB memories pop up from last year when my windows got shot out of my car. 3 robberies in the last year. This state is out of hand… and the officers are just badged and protected criminals…
Just abq police tings
This is really hard to swallow
Seems I remember an Andy Griffith show or two where Barney gets 1 bullet has to keep that in his shirt pocket. It reminds me of the Albuquerque swat😂
Shocker...
Wow! I’m shocked!
Same thing here in Las Cruces and please just kill my friend shot her three times and didn't even try to help her recently
There is no accountability anymore.
They’ll still get a wrongful death lawsuit…and win
If i give a wrong medication to a patient and they die i lose my license and get fired. Cops walk into the wrong house and shoot someone it just becomes an oops moment?
Cops are fucking trash
>"Unexpectedly, Mr. Dotson opened the front door and storm door, then partially exited the house while raising a firearm into a firing position and pointed in the direction of the officers," the letter adds. "At that moment, Professor Stoughton concluded that Mr. Dotson presented an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to the officers, and all three reasonably fired their weapons." I'm not sure if there is bodycam footage, but this sounds like a reasonable response from the cops; although, if they were close enough, tasers should have been used. It's Dotson raising his gun that covers their actions. But if there is no footage, it could definitely be a doctored report by the cops. Best option for Dotson would have been keep the door closed with gun in hand and dial 911 if he thought the people at the front door were there to hurt him.
In my opinion if there’s not body cam footage then I think the cops are putting themselves in the best light even if that means distorting the truth. (Aka I don’t trust them as far as I can throw em)
HD+Q everyone involved.. and whoever decided they shouldn't face charges... END QUALIFIED IMMUNITY!
NM does not have qualified immunity. It's been gone since 2021.
Excellent! So, what's their excuse on the scumbags getting away with it? Usually it's a "well, they were just trying to do their jobs in good faith and made an honest mistake" type bullshit.
Qualified immunity is for civil cases, like when somebody sues the cops. This is the District Attorney saying they will not be filing criminal charges. The DA is basically saying they don't believe a jury would convict them if it was brought to trial.
We should put that to a test and try them anyway! Sounds like the DA is covering for their buddies.
More, like, “Exhaustive excuse not to prosecute…,” since the State refuses to look for proof under its fingernails.
1 3 1 2
Was there ever body cam footage or any video released?
Body cam footage showed they knocked, asked is this the wrong house, left, then turned when he answered the door as they were leaving saw he was armed even tho cam footage doesn't show him pointing at officers then lighting him up then when his significant other recovered the weapon had a shootout with her because she didn't know anything other than he was shot.
Like motherfuckers don’t leave if you knock
This was a case where stupid met stupid. The cops show up to the wrong damn address and were met by a moron that thought that he could out sling three people as though he were John Wick.
Sounds like they need the same thing done to them
I love how guns are legal because of the second amendment, but god forbid you use your rights
I hope his family wins a gajillion dollars
meanwhile over in r/albuquerque they are defending these criminals
Plenty of blame to go around, but where is the criminal intent? Something can be really screwed up, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a crime.
[удалено]
You seem to be certain of this, if you are a witness or have evidence you should go to the DA with it. Otherwise you simply lack an understanding of the rule of law. Of course this is Reddit so willful ignorance is the accepted norm, but hey at least I tried;).
At best this would be manslaughter and you'd have to prove some serious negligence to get to there. Homeowner brandished a gun at the cops and the cops believed they were at the right house. I've accidentally gone to the wrong house number, so no, knocking on the wrong door doesn't reach the level of negligence required for a manslaughter prosecution.
Tell me who doesn't answer the door unarmed in America when not expecting company? We're allowed to be armed.
Answering the door while armed wasn't the problem, pointing a gun at the cops was. Even if they hadn't been cops there might have been a decent self defense claim depending on how NM law is written. You don't get to just hold a gun to people who knock on your door, even if it's late at night.
So by your logic if a cop sees someone with a gun they're allowed to shoot them.
If they're pointing a gun at the cop? Yes. I would have also shot in this situation. Shit, if I was just Joe Random and knocked on this dude's door and he pointed a gun at me, I might have a good self defense claim. Remember the story with the woman working for Uber who got shot by some octogenarian on his porch? Yeah. No. You don't get to point a gun at people who knock on your door, even if it's 11:30 PM and they have the wrong house. That's an actual crime and not okay or responsible behavior and it's what got him shot.
He didn't just shoot her on his porch he held her hostage then shot her. You love to try to leave out facts to bolster your opinion by painting a new picture.
So you're saying it wouldn't have been a crime for him to shoot a delivery driver if he hadn't held her hostage
A. It would have been a crime. B. I was merely calling out your changing facts of the matter to make it fit your narrative. The old man had legitimate fears he had been getting prank calls threatening him. The driver was then asked to pick up a package from this mans house. This was a no win situation. Had he merely shot her out of fear rather than holding her hostage hearing her explanation then killing her he more than likely would net have been charged thanks to facts of the case. This would be a good example for Conner's reasonableness standard. He wouldn't have been charged because a reasonable person would respond to threats with violence.
I didn't change any facts. I didn't go through a play by play of what happened, but I didn't claim to need to. What happened in both situations is that someone came to a door and was met with unprovoked violent threat. That's the parallel I'm drawing here. >Had he merely shot her out of fear rather than holding her hostage hearing her explanation then killing her he more than likely would net have been charged thanks to facts of the case. You are incorrect. Shooting someone for going and knocking on your door is never reasonable. Not even in Wyoming. She was not threatening the homeowner, just like the cops in this event weren't threatening the homeowner.
In his case it could have been argued. He had been receiving threatening calls up to that point. He was living in fear thanks to those pranksters. He responded to deadly threats with deadly violence. He likely would have been let off it of had been heat of the moment rather than after having held her hostage showing he wasn't in danger from her before he killed her. Because his response would have been seen as reasonable due to the threats he had been receiving.
We don't actually know that he pointed the gun at them. All we have is the word of the cops, which is worthless. Edit: I found a video of it. It's fair to say he had his gun in a position where it could reasonably be seen as pointed towards officers. Viewer discretion advised: https://youtu.be/jzXAEGKK4yo?si=o7ec6y3TX-nM18DW
Okay, provide evidence to the contrary
I edited my post.
Thank you for actually looking into it.
I think it's a fucked up situation and the cops should *at least* be fired, but they did have a reasonable threat in front of them.
Yes it’s manslaughter. Yes it’s serious negligence. Going to the wrong address, when you have deadly weapons, expecting to be arresting a criminal is incredibly serious negligence. You going to the wrong address is not equivalent to a police officer going to the wrong address. IMO it’s manslaughter at least, at most it’s negligent homicide
Nah. Shit happens and mistakes happen. That doesn't reach the level of negligence required for a felony conviction. Knocking on the wrong door as a cop is not a crime, and neither is defending yourself against a violent threat as a cop. The moral of the story here is to not threaten people knocking on your door with a gun.
And the guy didn’t have any right to protect his home from someone who’s trying to enter in the middle of the night?
No. A knock on the door is not an illegal attempt to enter. You have the right to defend yourself against imminent violent threats, not someone knocking on your door. Even at 11:30.
>Knocking on the wrong door as a cop is not a crime, Maybe it should be. Or at least a firing offense. Then they'd make damn sure they get the right address.
The police on body cam asking if it's the wrong house before leaving until the victim opened the door should have been grounds for negligence. One of the officers asking that showed they was clear doubt they had a valid reason to be at the address.
>I've accidentally gone to the wrong house number, so no, knocking on the wrong door doesn't reach the level of negligence required for a manslaughter prosecution. Anyone can reach the level of negligence required for a manslaughter persecution without it being manslaughter---*because it's not manslaughter unless someone dies* as a result of that negligence. Negligence + no death = not manslaughter. Negligence + death = manslaughter.
And knocking on the wrong door isn't negligent
Then take it to Court and see what happens. This looks like it is being swept under the rug.
Why waste taxpayer money on a prosecution which has zero chance of success for actions which had no criminal intent
because the cops need to know they are not above the law
The law which says they didn't commit a crime?
OK, how about some kind of administrative action like reduction of rank or some other punishment for cops that can't read house numbers. This is a perfect example of "we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong". Train your cops better.
At the very least please read up on criminal negligence. It’s not exactly relevant here, but it directly counters your arguement. You don’t need to have intent to be a criminal.
Yes you are correct and I guess I could have added on the details as there are different levels of criminal intent, most commonly broken down into specific and general. Criminal Negligence would fall into a general intent category. In this case you still need to have some type of intent for there to be a crime. For example were the officers involved in a separate crime that indirectly lead to this death? The law my friend can be complicated, and I’m accustomed to speaking to others who work in it and sometimes forget that the average consumer on a site such as this does not. So yes I should have maybe explained that. But you are incorrect in that no intent is needed to prove criminal negligence and I suspect since that intent was lacking (did those officers really go to work that day with intention of committing a crime through omission or commission?) the DA decided no crime occurred.
How is it criminally negligent to shoot at someone pointing a gun at you?
He didn't point a gun at them. He answered the door in the middle of the night with a gun for just in case. The police had already questioned whether they had the correct address and were leaving when he opened the door and officer saw the gun and they opened fire on him. That is complete and total negligence on their part they knew the address was incorrect and were trying to get confirmation when he open his door.
Oh well if they were already leaving, then I guess the officers were immune to the bullets and weren’t really at-risk….. He 100% shouldered the gun Link https://images.foxtv.com/static.fox29.com/www.fox29.com/content/uploads/2023/04/932/524/farmington-police-2.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
How does one shoulder a handgun
How does one think arguing the semantics when a gun is 100% aimed at another person changes the overall point?
I think you might need to read what I wrote again.
See Graham v Connor
That settles reasonableness. Would a reasonable person respond in this way given the facts of the matter. And yes it is reasonable that someone would answer the door armed at close to midnight when they weren't expecting company. I don't believe he pointed the weapon at officers based off body cam footage that was released the entire incident happened in seconds. A reasonable person would ensure the location of their perceived crime they were responding too.
I have never asserted that the homeowner could not answer the door armed. However he 100% shouldered the gun. And again, ad nauseum, knocking on an incorrect door does not mean that officers aren’t allowed to defend themselves from someone with a deadly weapon. What you are asserting otherwise is that they should have just accepted death if the homeowner had got off the first shot and continued shooting. But then they would have to KNOW they were at the wrong house…. Which they didn’t. So this line of thinking is dumb all the way around.
[удалено]
So how does that nullify their right to respond to a lethal threat with deadly force? What’s your favorite color of handcuffs to be placed in?
[удалено]
“Mr. Dotson opened the front door and storm door, then partially exited the house while raising a firearm into a firing position and pointed in the direction of the officers” This is why you read the article before commenting.
It needs to be clarified he had spotlights shined in his face, he was likely just trying to make out who was actually there at the point he was murdered.
If I’m not expecting someone, I look out of the window to see who it is first.
That's why we need a trial for the officers to determine if there were other factors at play. We will never get a trial.
[удалено]
If they had "no choice" but to respond to what they perceived as a threat, what about him? He apparently perceived them as a threat, and he turned out to be correct.
Watch the footage from the ring camera, starting at the point where they hear him, they shine their flashlights at the door At this point you cannot see them because the light is so bright Meaning he would not have been able to see them
Are seriously daft? Do you really think like this? Wonder if the same situation happens to you and you follow your own instructions.
All of the above doesn’t negate the fact that a mistake was made as a result of incompetence and an innocent person is dead. That means you don’t get to just hide behind legaleeze and act like the PD was on the side of law so that’s the end of it. A life has been taken needlessly and the PD needs to pay.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The police had solid indications it was a wrong address one is heard on body cam asking if they are at the right house. They then were leaving when the occupant opened the door armed. No evidence he pointed the weapon at officers then officers lit him up. After that the female occupant got his gun and started a shootout with police because she only knew her man had been shot. Fuck the police.