2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

As someone who used to investigate officer-involved shootings for the City of Portland in their Risk Management Department, one of the things that struck me in some of the articles about this case is that instead of briefing the the officers who were on the scene with the K-9, Beanbag and AR-15, the Sgt. on the scene told the primary officer talking to the subject to order him out and then went around the corner to brief a Lt. and Captain on the scene. The officers were completely surprised when the subject came out of the apartment and didn't know he had been texting and talking to the primary officer and it seemed a positive connection had been made. Also, why wasn't that Sgt. asked to speak to the Grand Jury?

posted 3 years, 3 months ago
view in context