But they asked him if he was drinking, and he said no. Wasn't that what someone here said?

This is the most important part of the whole statement they put out:

· Mr. Shaver ignored commands several times, having to be told repeatedly to keep his hands in plain sight.
· Mr. Shaver chose to quickly reach to his waistband, ignoring the commands given to him.
· Officer Brailsford and FIVE other officers observed this action and perceived it as a threat.
· Other officers began to raise their weapons, both lethal and non-lethal, to eliminate the threat.
· Officer Brailsford reacted quickly, firing his weapon, and eliminating the threat before other officers had the chance to fire.
· In reviewing the body camera recording of the incident, the lead detective notes, “the movement of Mr. Shaver’s right arm in the recording was a very similar motion to someone drawing a pistol from their waist band.”

According to police, the victim "ignored" commands and the officer "reacted quickly", eliminating a threat that didn't exist by using lethal force. Were the "non-lethal" weapons used?

Bottom line, for the nth time: an innocent and non-threatening man was killed by police because they put him in a situation in which he was scared shitless and couldn't follow their crazy instructions to the letter, and they felt threatened.

But they asked him if he was drinking, and he said no. Wasn't that what someone here said?

This is the most important part of the whole statement they put out:

· Mr. Shaver ignored commands several times, having to be told repeatedly to keep his hands in plain sight.
· Mr. Shaver chose to quickly reach to his waistband, ignoring the commands given to him.
· Officer Brailsford and FIVE other officers observed this action and perceived it as a threat.
· Other officers began to raise their weapons, both lethal and non-lethal, to eliminate the threat.
· Officer Brailsford reacted quickly, firing his weapon, and eliminating the threat before other officers had the chance to fire.
· In reviewing the body camera recording of the incident, the lead detective notes, “the movement of Mr. Shaver’s right arm in the recording was a very similar motion to someone drawing a pistol from their waist band.”

According to police, the victim "ignored" commands and the officer "reacted quickly", eliminating a threat that didn't exist by using lethal force. Were the "non-lethal" weapons used?

Bottom line, for the nth time: an innocent and non-threatening man was killed by police because they put him in a situation in which he was scared shitless and couldn't follow their crazy instructions to the letter, and they felt threatened.

"...eliminating a threat that didn't exist..."

There absolutely was reason to believe a threat existed. They were responding to a call for a guy with a firearm pointing it out the window. You don't think he represented a threat from the information the cops had???

And, for the nth plus one time, he was neither innocent nor non-threatening to the police at that time. It isn't fair to judge the actions of the police after the fact with information they didn't have at the time of the encounter. Police officers do get shot in the line of duty. Sometimes, they are just sitting in their patrol vehicle. Many times, the suspect doesn't want an encounter with the police even for trivial offenses because they have outstanding warrants, or they are breaking parole, or they think they are about to be detained for some other illegal activity they have engaged in like buying drugs or robbery. Frequently, we get reports in the media stating the suspect was unarmed or that he was innocent of any wrongdoing or that he was a pastor at their church or whatever.... In almost all cases, the cops have NO idea about any of those aspects of the detention. They have only the information given to them by a dispatcher or sometimes, the complainant.

What would have been your judgment if the same event had happened on the night of the Las Vegas shooting except they were in the Mandalay Bay hotel responding to a call for a guy pointing a rifle with a scope on it at people outside the hotel?

Greg

The police should not be in a position to kill an innocent person. If they felt threatened without proof of that threat (no weapon seen, for instance, or no hostage situation), they should have pulled back to a point where killing an innocent person was not close to the first choice. Shaver didn't commit suicide by police: the procedures that the police followed are clearly (well, apparently not) insufficient to prevent the killing of an innocent person.

Pretty sure that had the police been in the hallway of the Mandalay Bay that night, they'd have heard gunshots (you know, sounds that indicate an imminent threat) and acted appropriately. Bad comparison.

I have learned what, apparently, many here already knew. You can't face the facts of the case. The grounds for your objections have devolved to emotional hyperbole littered with the use of 'innocent person' over and over. I'm done. Take the last word....

Greg

Look at it this way. Is this a result you like?

If the answer is yes, well, end of discussion and carry on.

If the answer is no, then how do we not do this again in the future?

I doubt the vast majority of people want to see drunk and confused people shot. Even more disturbing to me are the times police are called because it is feared a mentally ill person will hurt themselves and then that person end up getting shot, which I suppose keeps them from hurting themselves but kind of defeats the purpose.

I really don't think the vast vast majority of cops like shooting anyone, let alone someone who turns out not to be an actual bad guy. So let's try to figure out how to not do that any more than is absolutely unavoidable.

If that takes better pay to hire better people, more training, training of civilians, whatever, so be it.

There is no way you can honestly look at this case and say that it could not have ended any other way.

Mesa Police Association
April 1, 2016 ·
The Mesa Police Association represents over 600 of the Mesa Police Department’s finest men and women who serve their community. We support our members adamantly when we believe their actions are reasonable and justified. Our members love their community, and risk their lives on a daily basis serving and protecting the public.
There was an officer involved shooting in January that has been covered widely by the local and national media. On Tuesday, the official report of that incident was released, along with some crime scene photographs and recordings. We thought we would go over several of the FACTS of the incident with you…
· On January 18th, 2016, Mr. Shaver was seen pointing what looked like a scoped assault rifle out of his hotel window.
· Two guests of the hotel were frightened for their safety, believing the person with the rifle was, “looking for potential targets”. The guests fled the area and notified the hotel staff.
· Mr. Shaver committed a felony by recklessly displaying a dangerous instrument (ARS 13-2904A6).
· Hotel staff observed Mr. Shaver with a rifle in his room, and observed he appeared intoxicated.
· Hotel staff called the police for help, and officers responded to the call of a, “subject with a gun”.
· Upon contact near his room, officers gave clear commands on what to do, getting Mr. Shaver’s acknowledgment that he understood.
· Mr. Shaver ignored commands several times, having to be told repeatedly to keep his hands in plain sight.
· Mr. Shaver chose to quickly reach to his waistband, ignoring the commands given to him.
· Officer Brailsford and FIVE other officers observed this action and perceived it as a threat.
· Other officers began to raise their weapons, both lethal and non-lethal, to eliminate the threat.
· Officer Brailsford reacted quickly, firing his weapon, and eliminating the threat before other officers had the chance to fire.
· In reviewing the body camera recording of the incident, the lead detective notes, “the movement of Mr. Shaver’s right arm in the recording was a very similar motion to someone drawing a pistol from their waist band.”
· After securing the hotel room, a scoped and silenced pellet rifle, similar in appearance to an assault rifle, was located near Mr. Shaver’s window.
· After an autopsy, it was discovered that Mr. Shaver’s blood alcohol content was a .29, almost four times the legal limit of intoxication .