A Detroit Police officer is under investigation and has been placed on “no gun status” after ballistic analysis revealed she shot two innocent bystanders while responding to a call on the city’s west side.

Interim Detroit Police Chief Todd Bettison updated the media in a November 27 press conference about the incident which occurred earlier this year on June 1. Bettison reported that Michigan State Police ballistic analysis received only a day earlier showed conclusively that two women, now 20 and 23, were injured when one of his officers fired at suspects during a “large block party” while responding to an active shooter. 

One 911 caller described a “massive shootout” just before 2 AM on Trinity at Florence, in the area of McNichols and Grand River. Apparently not exaggerating, police recovered eight firearms and 93 shell casings

“The scene was very chaotic, the scene was loud. People were screaming, some were in distress,” according to Bettison.

The officer was searching a home when she encountered two armed subjects and issued a verbal command to drop their guns. One suspect was armed with a handgun and the other with an “AR-style type rifle, similar to an AK-47 assault rifle,” Bettison reported, adding that the officer fired “approximately five rounds” from her department-issued weapon, striking one of the subjects.

The injured subject was ultimately apprehended by officers inside his house where first aid was rendered and a tourniquet was applied which “…saved his life,” according to the Interim Chief.

“In a scene like this, the officers were only on scene for less than a minute, split-second decisions had to be made… Officers were left to deal with the armed assailant standing amidst innocent partygoers,” Bettison said.

The two women who were the unintended victims in the incident were treated at the hospital and released without further information given on the extent of their injuries.

Bettison says the officer “ feared for her life,” and has approximately eight years with the force and no job violations on her record.

Investigators continue to collect evidence, interview witnesses, and review video footage while the officer remains on “no gun status” pending the final outcome. More information is expected to be released at a later date.

“In those block parties when you have 4 or 5 hundred people and an active shooter…you have multiple people firing weapons. And if someone takes a target at our officers, it’s going to be hard to defend themselves and also not hit an innocent bystander. It’s just so condensed,” according to Bettison.

In such a chaotic situation, it is hard to imagine this incident chalked up to anything more than a horrible accident in a crowded and dangerous environment. It would be a shame to see a good officer’s career negatively impacted as the men and women of law enforcement face life-and-death situations with only moments to react, and this seems an awful lot like an officer placing herself in harm’s way to protect and serve her community. On the other hand, describing a rifle as “AR-style type rifle, similar to an AK-47 assault rifle” is just plain unforgivable. 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

34 COMMENTS

  1. It sounds like this was a classic “no win” situation.

    Being brutally analytical, the greatest odds of minimizing the number of injured innocents AND minimizing the severity of injuries to innocents requires firing on the active attacker even if that means some hits to some innocents.

    The “calculus” for my previous statement is very simple. An active attacker–especially a spree killer–who faces no opposition is capable of striking several dozen people and is also capable of placing carefully aimed shots/strikes (depending on weapon) to maximize the devastation of injuries. On the other hand, if armed bystanders or armed law enforcement start shooting at the active attacker, that active attacker will no longer be able to strike several dozen people–and he/she will not be able to carefully aim strikes/shots which will reduce the severity of injuries. Furthermore, any hits to bystanders (from other armed bystanders or law enforcement) will be random in nature and much less likely to cause severe injuries.

    Here is the simple truth: an active attacker who ambushes a crowd of people is going to create a significant number of casualties and there is no possible way to ensure that armed bystanders or law enforcement do not land hits on bystanders in the process of neutralizing the attacker. All we can do is minimize the attacker’s damage. And that requires armed resistance as soon as possible.

    • And before someone starts screaming about how we can stop such large body counts if we can somehow magically eliminate firearms from the populace: even if that were somehow possible, there are countless other ways that an active attacker could maim/murder several dozen people without firearms. Alternatives include vehicles, poisons, fire, swords, archery, and explosives to name a few.

      Nevertheless, since it is utterly and totally impossible to remove firearms from the populace, it is better if we have as many responsible armed defenders as possible to resist active attackers as soon as possible.

      • FWIW:

        “Although almost two-thirds of all mass murders were committed with firearms, non-firearm means resulted in significantly more casualties per event.”

        h ttps://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/researchers-issue-first-report-mass-shootings-columbia-mass-murder-database

        • Not true – look at the stats in Japan, Germany, England, and Australia. No firearms in general, but lots and lots of mass murders with other weapons.

      • somehow, I dont see “we can eliminate firearms” being a serious consideration on this website. Just say’n.

        …and nor should it be.

  2. The out of control block party call should be handled with a strafing warthog.

    The problem will go away almost immediately.

    • An Apache helicopter with it’s chain gun and Hellfires would probably be a better option for a small area.

        • Nah, grazing fire is perfect for violent out of control block party crowds. A few M240’s – much cheaper and easier to deploy.

  4. Anytime there is an officer involved shooting the LEOs weapon is going to have to be surrendered for the duration of the investigation. It is not indicative of the officer doing anything wrong. When I was working I carried a personally owned 1911. If I had to surrender it to FDLE I would have gone home opened a safe and put another in my holster. I could go back to that well a half dozen times before I had to change to another caliber.

  6. Police bullets hitting the innocent is absoulutely unacceptable. If officers have to take fire to avoid the possibility of hitting an innocent with gunfire, then they must; this what they are paid to do. Going home safe at the end of a shift must not be their highest priority.

    • This is real life and not a fucking John Wick movie. I’m not going to sit here and act like police officers are infallible, but why don’t you sign up for the academy and show us how it’s done Brian? Maybe, just maybe if the suspect had complied with orders this wouldn’t have happened. A tough concept to understand I’m sure.

    • Says the armchair expert whose knowledge of firearms is from action movies and experience is from video games.

  7. Brian, your right. It is unacceptable. Sometimes, though it may be unavoidable. This puts me in mind of Columbine. When LE was criticized for not immediately making entry. The sheriff explained that they were waiting for SWAT because they didn’t want to make things worse. The mother of a victim said, “They were shooting people and blowing up bombs. How does it get worse?” Sometimes there will be collateral damage. It’s a dangerous planet we stand on. Act accordingly.

    • It has just come to light from the Congressional Investigation of the 2nd Trump attempted assassination that the Secret Service agent who fired at the potential shooter did so 5 times from 5 feet away and missed every time. Wonder where those rounds ended up and how could he have possibly missed being that they are so highly trained.

      • Was that the one with what may have been improvised armor in the intended fire point? May not have missed so much as failed to penetrate. But I am probably being a bit optimistic on that guess.

      • “…the Secret Service agent who fired at the potential shooter did so 5 times from 5 feet away and missed every time.”

        Suppressive fire can be a useful tactic.

    • It has just come to light from the Congressional Investigation of the 2nd Trump attempted assassination that the Secret Service agent who fired at the potential shooter did so 5 times from 5 feet away and missed every time. Wonder where those rounds ended up and how could he have possibly missed being that they are so highly trained. Also the Secret Service was made aware at 2:30am that morning that President Trump was planning to play at the course that day yet no attempt was made to secure the area prior to his arrival. Allowing the potential shooter to set up a hide for a full 12 hours before the incident.

  8. Glad it wasn’t me because I’m not a cop and I’d be in jail waiting to go to court on involuntary manslaughter charges.
    But seeing it’s a cop they take the gun away for evidence, like Gadsden Flag says, then the cop goes home and gets another gun, like Gadsden Flag says.
    Paycheck continues.

  10. 02:00 and hundreds of occupants? Victims should not stand next to or behind people whose actions tend to draw in-coming fire. Poor choices.

  11. Cops or bad guys hiding behind your car during a shoot out only results in your vehicle becoming a sieve.
    Nobody wants to pay, not even your insurance company.
    We can’t control where a bad guy hides but please coppers hide behind your own vehicle, and stay away from mine please and thank you.

  12. Ballistic analysis has confirmed that the police officer shot the bystanders during a recent incident. The investigation revealed that the officer’s firearm was discharged in the direction of the crowd, leading to the injuries. Ballistic analysis confirms police officer shot bystanders, providing critical evidence in the ongoing case. This discovery has raised concerns about law enforcement’s use of force during public encounters.

Comments are closed.