Santa Clara (CA) police kill bat-wielding woman

[KamaAina]

http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Santa-Clara-police-kill-bat-wielding-woman-5400744.php

Santa Clara police shot and killed a 53-year-old woman after she charged at officers with a baseball bat, authorities said Monday.

The incident began about 4:50 p.m. Sunday when police received a call from a woman threatening to harm herself and others, police said. She said she had taken pills, wanted police to shoot her and would attack officers with a bat, authorities said.

When two officers responded to her apartment in the Riverwood Place complex at 5090 Lick Mill Blvd., the woman charged at them with an aluminum bat, police said. Fearing for their safety, the officers opened fire, striking the woman, police said.

She died at a hospital. Her name and the names of the officers have not been released.

One of my favorite human beings lives in that complex with her two cats.

For those of you playing along at home, Santa Clara is a normally quiet community of about 90,000 (considered smallish in the Bay Area) next to San Jose. It is the home of the 49ers' new Levi's Stadium, so I certainly hope its police force isn't riddled with douchebadges like these two!

[Voice for Peace]

1. 2 officers fearing for their safety against a 53 year old woman with an aluminum bat?

[alcibiades_mystery]

2. You're about to get a million responses about how dangerous bats are, and etc.

But you're absolutely correct. Two police officers should be able to handle and disarm a 53-year old woman with a baseball bat in some way short of filling her full of bullets. It's ridiculous.

[LisaL]

4. If she were attacking you with a bat you would have a right to defend yourself (with lethal force).

But police shouldn't have this right?

[Beaverhausen]

5. Police are trained to deal with this kind of thing

couldn't they have at least shot her to only wound her so they could take the bat? Jesus how can you defend this?

[LisaL]

7. This is the same argument I hear over and over again.

But police aren't trained to shoot someone to wound them.
As for how I can defend this? Seriously?
I wouldn't want someone to attack me with a bat, and I presume neither does the police.

[Beaverhausen]

11. Is the penalty for swinging a bat at someone death?

If you aren't trained as a police officer, we don't care what you want someone to attack you with. And if they aren't trained to disarm someone without killing them, they need better training.

[Aerows]

84. Do you regularly carry a firearm

and carry it to the range?

[Lizzie Poppet]

14. No such thing as "shoot to wound" with firearms.

That's pure Hollywood.

However, I'd like to know why they didn't use a non-lethal method first. A taser, for example... Was the situation really such that they needed to draw and fire immediately to avoid serious injury?

[tazkcmo]

38. Not pure Hollywood

I was trained in the military that there were times when I shouldn't aim center mass at my target but should aim at the the thigh area to take my target down.

[Lizzie Poppet]

66. That's still not "shoot to wound."

If you were indeed trained to shoot below center of mass like that (and I'll take you at your word on that, although I've never remotely heard of such a thing and will be asking one of my several ex-military shooting friends about it), it wouldn't have been for the purpose of wounding, it would have been for the purpose of a faster take-down. Snipers don't always aim for center of mass, either...but again, shooting to wound isn't in any way part of that equation, either.

Regardless, I know of no case in which any qualified instructor teaching shooting for self-defense advocates anything other than shooting for center of mass. As others have pointed out, even c-of-m shooting at a moving, aware target in an actual scenario of self-defense can be very difficult. Shooting at a moving extremity in such a situation is something even the most expert shooters in the world would have difficulty doing successfully. Twice-a-year-at-the-range cops? Not a chance.

[sarisataka]

79. What military was teaching that?

I never heard of it...

Also the thigh is a very deadly place to take a hit. If the femoral artery is severed death will occur in under five minutes without immediate treatment

[Aerows]

85. Do you carry a firearm

and regularly take it to the range?

[sarisataka]

91. I do

and have since the 80's. Do you have a question?

[Aerows]

92. I do

Do you responsibly check to make certain it is loaded or unloaded at appropriate times?

Do you keep it away from minor children, so that it can't be used on other people's children?

Here's the thing. I live in the sticks. I *KNOW* you need a shotgun occasionally because who wants to contend with a feral hog. The problem I have is with a proliferation of guns in areas where there is no need for them, such as heavily populated areas that don't have roaming wild animals that can maim and kill (other than humans)

Those are the things I like to ask responsible gun owners, and I'll be the first one to pick one up if I have to do so. It isn't a problem with people in the sticks, they already know what to use such a device for - vermin and things that destroy crops and endanger people.

The problem is that there are a slew of people that are in perfectly free of wildlife areas, and the only dangerous person is the guy standing next to you.

[sarisataka]

94. Good questions:

Do you responsibly check to make certain it is loaded or unloaded at appropriate times?

I religiously follow the assumption every gun is always loaded. My cleaning routine has me checking a gun is clear 4 times before actually disassembling.
The only places my gun is loaded other than a firing range, is in my holster or in a bio-metric safe.

Do you keep it away from minor children, so that it can't be used on other people's children?

All guns are kept in one of three places. On my person; every holster I use has some form of retention to hinder both unauthorized access or accidentally falling out.
Second is a bio-metric safe keyed to myself and my wife. the bypass keys are not even in our apartment.
Lastly are the guns I share with my brother. We inherited a significant collection and built a multi-layered storage that has three separate locks securing the guns. It also is concealed from casual observation by a movable bookcase.

IME rural people are more familiar handling guns than urban people. Countering this is rural folks, who know better, may have a "watch this" moment more often than city types as a gunshot in a rural area doesn't get the attention a shot in an urban area does.

Cities are free of four legged predators but have more two legged. It does not mean that a gun should be used except as a last resort. Last year I faced an aggressive pan handler/ attempted robbery while armed. I convinced him to leave without ever displaying a weapon. I support training for anyone who carries including a focus on making full use of the force continuum, avoidance and de-escalation.


EDIT> I should add that though there is no shoot to wound nor shoot to kill, the base assumption choosing what level of force to use must be: once a firearm is employed someone will die- as that is the worst possible outcome.

[Lizzie Poppet]

100. Yes to both.

I've been a CCW permit holder for about 15 years, and I have a range session as part of my regular weekly schedule. I miss the occasional week due to travel and such, but not very often. I suspect that's a good bit more range time than most permit holders, though...shooting is a hobby for me as well as my chosen method of self defense.*


*Well, chosen last-ditch method, that is. For anyone, the best primary self-defense "tool" lies between the ears.

[Hip_Flask]

15. You're half right...

They are trained to respond to lethal force with lethal force...

What do you suggest they do? Grab it out of the air Terminator style?

[JVS]

93. Their training evidently says to shoot her.

[Jenoch]

95. Yours is one of the most silly posts I have read on DU in a long time.

My point is not to say the cops should have shot this woman. You have seen too many television programs and movies. It is not possible for LEO to do what you suggest.

[mythology]

98. There is no such thing as shooting to wound other than in the movies

It's improbably hard to put a bullet in somebody with enough accuracy to injure them enough to ensure they stay down and yet not kill them.

[tazkcmo]

8. Me and her are the same age

I'm confident I could have disarmed her with out killing her and I weigh about 130 lbs.

[LisaL]

9. Well it's too bad she didn't try to attack you then.

[tazkcmo]

13. I believe you.

But what's your point? That a much larger man with more training and in better physical condition couldn't have done the same? Perhaps a taser could have been used? Pepper spray? Maybe even evasion techniques? You really believe the police's ONLY option was death?

[LisaL]

16. I am not saying it was their only option.

I am saying the option that they used was legal.

[tazkcmo]

20. Legal

Not the same as appropriate. It's legal to respond to your post with vulgarity, name calling and all sorts of other language but that would be inappropriate and not productive. Kind of like shooting a drugged up, 53 year old woman yielding a bat when I could use any number of non-lethal methods to disarm her.

[LisaL]

36. It might be legal to respond to my post with name calling, in a sense that you won't get arrested.

But not allowed by the rules of this site.
And regardless, I fail to see what it has to do with the case.
Aluminum bat could be used as a lethal weapon.
Police therefore are allowed to use lethal force to defend themselves.

[tazkcmo]

43. Pretty sure the police

don't work for DU and if it's against the rules, it's illegal. And you've only just repeated your point that it's legal to do what they did and I stand by my statement that I believe there were other options available aside from killing her.

[Chan790]

99. That's not for you or I to determine.

There's a review board, they'll have a hearing to determine appropriateness of their actions.

If they acted inappropriately, they'll be charged; even if acquitted after the finding of fault by the review board, they'll be fired.

(I expect however that this will be cleared by the review board as an appropriate use of force in the line of duty.)

[tazkcmo]

101. As are most are.

And we are fully free to determine what we wish though it carries zero weight. While I disagree that this was a reasonable use of deadly force I respect those opinions that are contrary to my own and the right to express them. That respect is what makes a discussion board like DU enjoyable.

[Aerows]

47. Oh, well

Legal trumps all. Ethical, moral, appropriate? That doesn't matter anymore. "We do what we can get away with under the law."

Fine argument that we are a civilized society anymore, that.

[randome]

53. 'Get away with'? Are you suggesting police are serial killers?

Maybe retreating wasn't a valid option. Maybe there were other people present who would have been next on this crazed woman's list. We don't know.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Aerows]

71. Have you ever held a bat before?

How many hands do you have to use to effectively use it against grown men and women that have tazers, nightsticks and mace?

If you said one, you have never used a bat. Now tell me, while you are wielding said bat, are you more dangerous than a person holding a gun? No? Do you have a nightstick? Are you physically fit enough to dart away from swinging a baseball bat and pull a nightstick? No? You are too physically unfit to be a police officer.

Sigh. It's probably not even your fault, either. We trained you to use the maximum force possible and you do it. Then you get transitioned into a job where you should use the minimum force possible to defuse a situation and make an arrest, and expect different behavior.

That's what I don't like.

[randome]

75. Did they have tazers? Nightsticks? Were others nearby endangered?

Let's assume they had a chance to dodge this woman. Where would she go next? Run into a crowd and begin bashing people?

None of us knows unless we were on the scene so I don't think it's safe to assume anything one way or the other.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[Aerows]

78. Oh for God's sake Randome

Don't even pretend this was a situation like a mass shooting. It was a damn woman with a bat. A bat isn't a weapon of mass destruction.

Any LEO that is too dumb to differentiate between bat=mass murder and bat=block it with a nightstick and subdue the 53 year old woman is too stupid to BE a LEO.

EDIT: And I'll add - too cowardly.

[randome]

17. For most tasers, don't you still need to be fairly close?

And does every cop carry one?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Lizzie Poppet]

21. Yes, but still well out of "bat's reach."

This is, at present (in that we've only the briefest glimpse into the details what happened at this point) my biggest question: why not go for the taser instead of the service pistol?

[randome]

23. Maybe they didn't have any?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Lizzie Poppet]

27. Could be.

A lot remains unknown about how it actually played out.

[tazkcmo]

22. Don't know

nor would I place that at the top of preferable options as tasers aren't exactly non-lethal. It was just one option that came to mind.

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. oh for the love of Gawd

Fucking rights this. Fucking rights that. What about their rights? What about their rights? Blah blah fucking blah.

Gawd FUCK.

Two police officers should be able to disarm a 53 year old woman with a bat. It's not a point of law. It's common sense to anybody who isn't a gun humping fucking ASSHOLE.

[randome]

18. Everyone keeps harping on '53'. That doesn't necessarily mean she was old and decrepit.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[tazkcmo]

24. lol

I lol'ed because I don't view myself as old and decrepit either and not to diminish you or your post. Her age is useful only in the sense the police officers were probably much younger and in better physical condition that the victim.

[randome]

26. In general, I think police SHOULD be in much better physical condition.

But we see too many photos -even today- of pudgy slackers who barely fit into the uniform. Or maybe that's a caricature I've latched onto.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers. It's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[tazkcmo]

29. It's the exception

not the rule. There certainly are some just as there are in any other group of people.

[Ed Suspicious]

28. I would back away for a bit and go back to negotiating. How fucking hard is this?

[tazkcmo]

31. But but

She had a bat! And an aluminum one at that! How do we know that she didn't play college softball or something?

[LisaL]

61. What is it do you think they should have negotiated about?

From what has been reported, she wanted police to shoot her and thus gotten what she wanted.

[ladjf]

102. Well, you could just walk away unless you are wheelchair bound. t

[Aerows]

82. Bats are so damn dangerous

one bit me when I was up in my belfry and I had to get rabies shots.

(just trying for levity here, raccoon situation I get endlessly teased over)

It's screwed up.

[agbdf]

77. Shame on them

Perhaps using a stun gun might have been a better alternative? Maybe, backing off a little if no other bystanders were in danger?
Maybe using their academy training to counter the bat with a nightstick?

How much danger was this 53 year old woman with her Louisville Slugger?

We live in strange and sad times.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

3. one of the grandkids is SCPD. He's also a Buddhist

[Iggo]

6. Yay, Cops!

They're the best!

[bravenak]

89. +1

So true!! The bestest!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Who trained those guys? Yosemite Sam?

[Brother Buzz]

19. Alameda County Sheriff's Department Academy

At least, that's where SCPD sent my niece

[KamaAina]

42. That would explain a lot

Oakland police got quite a bit of backup from Alameda County sheriff's deputies during Occupy.

[Nye Bevan]

25. One swing to the head with such a bat could kill, paralyze,

or cause permanent brain damage.

While I do not celebrate this woman's death, it's a better outcome than a police officer becoming a vegetable.

[tazkcmo]

30. Ok

Then any circumstance where there is the remotest possibility of a police officer being harmed is a situation where deadly force is ok.

[Nye Bevan]

35. Well, when someone is actually charging at you, swinging such a bat,

I think it's a little more than "remote".

[Ed Suspicious]

40. Have you ever been in a fight? I have been in my share as a youth, and I have never myself or known

any of my hooligan friends to find the need to kill the aggressor. I'm so sick of the Judge Dredd policing that so many here find acceptable.

[LisaL]

45. Were you using aluminum bats in these fights?

[Aerows]

76. If you use an aluminum bat

against people armed with mace, nightsticks and pepper spray, you are at a severe disadvantage because they have range on you. No need to shoot just because it is legal. "I can get away with it" is not a valid excuse to take someone's life.

[KamaAina]

33. Simple: Stay out of bat range.

Shouldn't be that difficult for a trained police officer.

[LisaL]

41. So you are suggesting police are supposed to retreat when confronted with force?

[KamaAina]

44. Uh, no, they could have circled around her.

Even major league baseball players don't have very good swings from behind.

[randome]

58. So what if she charges at you and you don't have maneuvering room?

Just stand there and 'take one for the team'? Or use the only available weapon you have? We don't know the exact circumstances yet but I doubt they had the time to circle around her. And that's disregarding the possibility that she would have taken those couple of seconds to target someone else nearby.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Aerows]

81. What if she was charging you

and you had eaten bad eggs for breakfast, weren't feeling well and not up to the job?

You can what if to death, but this doesn't make what happened ethical, moral or right.

[Ed Suspicious]

48. Are you saying they shouldn't?

[LisaL]

52. Are you suggesting they should have run away?

[Comrade Grumpy]

54. Ask the BLM. They seem to have managed to defuse that much scarier situation.

[Ed Suspicious]

34. Police lives are worth precisely how many civilian's?

I reject that the risk of getting beaned with a bat is a less acceptable outcome than death of a troubled woman.

[LisaL]

37. If somebody tries to attack you with a bat, then by all means take the risk.

[Ed Suspicious]

46. Wilting flower when faced with a bat finds strength of mind, body, and character to shoot aggressor

dead. I would not. I guess when you lean more heavily on the tools of gun metal grey you lean less heavily on the grey matter that keeps you from shooting guns into troubled people you are charged with serving and protecting. When all you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail.

[Aerows]

59. "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

I'd go further to say "If all you are trained in is using a hammer, the other tools in your toolkit won't be able to remove a screw."

[randome]

62. Well, she WANTED to be shot so you could say the police 'served her'.

That was mean but I couldn't resist. Gallows humor!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Aerows]

49. Did the police officer have a nightstick?

Or are they so lame that they can't even block a bat with a nightstick, when half of America over 16 and under 50 could if they weren't disabled?

It's the same bullshit over and over again. They think with their guns, not with their heads or their hearts. We are training people to respond with the maximum allowed force - not the minimum necessary to defuse a situation and the American people are dying because of that.

[ladjf]

103. Any one who is dumb enough to allow a person to just walk up and hit them on the

head may already be "brain dead".

[fredamae]

32. Yes, Bats are potential dangerous

However---this type of situation does NOT warrant a Death Sentence judged and juried in a moment by LEO!

Wait her out--get a negotiator--tranquilize her or even tazing would have been better--then hospitalize her.

[Nye Bevan]

39. The tranquilizer dart causing immediate sleep is also more of a Hollywood thing.

Unfortunately real life is trickier.

[Aerows]

51. No

When you train people to use the maximum force that is legal, you get a police state. We should be training people to use the minimum force necessary to defuse a situation and make an arrest.

The sort of thinking that what is normal policing calls for "Dirty Harry" tactics is Hollywood. Shooting people for no other reason than you can get away with it is police state tactics.

You are flat out wrong about this, Nye.

[Nye Bevan]

55. I do prefer the British system, where police are not generally armed,

except for special teams in specific situations. But given the ridiculous non-gun control in the US, I don't think that would work here. Unfortunately, the police here are armed, everyone knows they are armed and that they are trained to counter a potentially lethal threat with a lethal response. Attempting to micromanage their response when they have to make a split-second decision in a situation like this will only result in more police officers being killed.

[Aerows]

56. Do you live in Great Britain? n/t

[Nye Bevan]

57. Connecticut (nt)

[Aerows]

65. So you think a person with a bat

is surreptitiously carry a gun while their hands are full of bat? Would she be shooting with her feet and toes? Were they afraid she'd whip out 9mm from her breasts?

[Nye Bevan]

70. Yeah, you got it. Have a good day.

[Aerows]

73. Thanks, glad you realized

that it was a dumb argument from the get go.

[sakabatou]

60. Agreed

[KamaAina]

50. I certainly hope this PD has riot gear

given the potential for joyous-yet-scary celebrations after Niners games.

Problem solved. Not even Buster Posey would be able to do damage to a cop wearing riot gear. (Of course, he uses a wooden bat. )

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. From the description, I am betting on this being a good shooting

sorry. She rushed them with a weapon. Yes, a bat IS a weapon.

It is not yay cops, sounds more like yay a mental health system that once again failed.

[Logical]

67. How many police actually have "bad shootings"? Nt

[Nye Bevan]

74. It happens.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/17/new-orleans-police-officers-katrina-trial

[Logical]

80. Extremely rare. nt

[Aerows]

86. I generally agree with you

but in this? I firmly disagree. If you can't disarm a person with a baseball bat without killing them, you don't deserve to be an LEO.

Not going to fly.

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. Well then I think we will disagree

I know the Standards and Procedures for many police departments, and it was well within the lethal use of force.

If, and there are many ifs. the officers had room to retreat and get out a taser (then people here would scream too) or pepper spray, then they could have tried that first. But if they had no room to retreat, this is the kind of situation where lethal force is authorized, and not just in the United States.

I have seen cops shoot a suspect wielding a club as well. A bat is a club.

[Aerows]

90. Agree to disagree

my friend. It could have been handled differently, but your opinion is a good as mine.

[Spirochete]

64. Good thing she didn't have a hockey stick -

they'd have sent in a SWAT team...

[cate94]

68. She wanted suicide by cop

and warned them in advance that she would have a bat and she wanted to be shot.

Being confronted suddenly by a bat wielding person might cause you to go for a gun, but when you know in advance what to expect, you would think they could have come up with a better plan. A plan other than shooting a person in need of medical attention.

[randome]

69. This day will go down in history...

...as the day the robo-cops got started!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[struggle4progress]

72. That would be an interesting short film

(Call center)
911. What is your emergency?
"I've .. uh .. taken some pills .. and .. uh .. I have this .. uh .. baseball bat .. uh .. and .. uh .. I want the police to .. uh .. shoot me .. so .. uh .. I'm going to attack the .. uh .. officers with the bat"

(Convenience store)
Finish the fuckin donut, Louie. We got a call
"Mmmph. OK. What?"
Wacko on pills in Riverwood. Has a bat. Says she wants us to shoot her
"Again? Mmmph. Sometimes I hate my job"

(Woman pacing back and forth with bat)
Where are the goddam cops? I called fifteen minutes ago ...

[Kelvin Mace]

83. Where was the goddamned TASER

they are always torturing people with?

[LittleBlue]

88. She clearly wanted to die

While this is not the best way, she wanted it to end and she ended it. I don't fault the officers in "suicide by cop" cases.

Hopefully she has found peace in death.

[rollin74]

96. suicide by cop

unfortunate but I can't fault the officers for reacting the way they did

[yuiyoshida]

97. Years ago I remember watching an episode

of some police show. They were taking BATON training..in the episode, and showed how to use a baton for self defense. I am guessing they don't bother teaching that any longer. It seems so much easier to just shoot someone... Meh.

[JJChambers]

104. Woman attacks police with metal bat...

DU blames police for defending themselves. Makes sense...

[KamaAina]

105. Naturally, this is front-page news in the San Jose paper

The front page of the "Local News" section!!

[2banon]

106. Yeah. Shocking..

I have friends and family in Santa Clara. This is bizarre.