Behind the 85 Shots (Philly Confidential)

Behind the 85 Shots

A week ago, residents on Taney Street, near Tasker, witnessed seven cops fatally shoot a man named "Butter."
Butter, whose real name was Steve Miller, was high on "wet." He was waving a .40-caliber handgun as police aimed their weapons at his torso.
Police later said officers fired 85 shots to take down the man. Sixteen of those slugs ate threw Butter's body.

Of course, emotions exploded during days following this event. The Daily News-- especially this reporter/blogger--tried to be as thorough as possible while chasing down facts surrounding this incident.

Taney Streets residents felt the police should have convinced Butter to drop his gun, rather than pulling their triggers; Residents told reporters that neighbors fruitlessly warned cops that Butter was harmless.
On the flip-side, police--of all ranks including the commissioner--told this half of Philly Confidential that the seven cops did nothing wrong. The man wouldn't put his gun down. End of argument.

We are sure that Daily News readers came to their own conclusions. Some felt that Philadelphia police have become over zealous and have little respect for human life. Last year, cops broke a record after they fatally shot 22 people. This year the count is at nine. Meanwhile, others expressed that city cops are in the midst of a losing battle against well-armed thugs who have no inhibitions with slaying an officer. Note Officer Gary Skerski.

The point of this post isn't to debate which side is correct. PC can't draw any conclusions until she learns all the facts. See, the point of this post is to show how hard it can be to track down the truth during controversial situations.

Here is a list of our beefs from the past week:

1. Residents repeated rumors and not facts--This phenomenon seems to occur when a Philadelphia cop shoots a well-liked neighborhood resident. Usually, only a handful of people see the incident take place. But, somehow, within minutes the whole community claims to have seen the event. They then swear to local media that they are telling the truth. In the Taney Street case, a bevy of "witnesses" told PC that white cops were firing at Butter while screaming racial epithets. Some brazen cops even reloaded their Glocks to continue firing on the dying man, these people said.

Before PC drove out to South Philly to hear the stories, she made sure to check in with a handful of police officials to learn their facts of what took place. She was told that none of the seven cops were white and none of them reloaded to continue to shoot.
Rather, officials said, cops had to reload their Glocks. After an officer fires his city gun, protocol requires that they remove the clip for further investigation. After removing the questionable clip, the cop must put in a fresh one so they are not out on the street unarmed.

Similar problems occurred 18 months ago when a narcotics cops shot and killed Tyree Wallace--cousin of basketball star Rasheed Wallace--in West Oak Lane during a 2005 drama. Wallace shot a narcotics sergeant in the groin during the exchange of gun fire. “Witnesses” told PC all sorts of outlandish stories hoping their thoughts would end up in print. That’s when PC noticed that, for some reason, police-involved shootings cause people to make stuff up.

2. The Police Department clammed up--Cops complained that when an officer shoots a person the whole neighborhood is ready to go on-record to tell the media what they saw. But when a thug kills a regular ole’ civilian no one wants to speak up. Interestingly enough, the department sorta did the same thing. Most of the time, when a Philadelphian is victimized, police release some sort of information.. Yet after the Taney Street drama, officials had little to say.
Yes, they did provide the general circumstances of what happened that evening. Yet, when reporters wanted to learn more about how cops are trained to shoot their guns, the department clammed up. This blogger wanted to spend the day at the shooting range and see firsthand how Philadelphia’s finest are taught to handle their weapons. But without proper approval the idea was nixed.
PC she tried everything she could: She interviewed several top-brass--on the condition of anonymity--who explained police policies on deadly force and dealing with the mentally challenged. Heck, she wanted to put something in the story explaining how cops are trained not to open fire on every villain they come across. After the department learned that PC was sniffing around, the spokesman finally opened up. Sadly, it was too little to late. The spokesman called too close to deadline and most of his spin didn't get in the paper.

Why didn’t the department want to be honest and open?
Didn’t officials want the public to understand their side of things?
It wasn’t just PC who was flabbergasted about the wall of silence, the Daily News editorial board had this to say in an editorial last week:

But it's a serious thing when a police officer discharges his weapon, especially when it leads to death, whatever the circumstances. The department says that even when its own reports on shootings are done, the reports are not accessible to the public.

Bottom line: Your two favorite crime reporters always obsess about getting the most complete story in the paper. Unfortunately, we have up until 10 pm—the daily deadline—each night to chase down all the facts for the morning’s paper. Sometimes, just sometimes, we don’t have enough time to win our battle against those who are withholding the facts.

We hate to lose.
Viva La Truth!!!!

Posted on July 16, 2007 11:06 PM | Permalink

Comments (48)

AS:

I'm glad to see comments back on.

Posted by AS | July 24, 2007 10:57 AM

Posted on July 24, 2007 10:57

Anonymous:

Fuckin stop n frisk rat cops killed another black man and the philly medias asleep at the wheel,Good job assholes!!

Posted by Anonymous | July 29, 2007 11:35 PM

Posted on July 29, 2007 23:35

Anonymous:

Wait, didn't he *shoot* at the cops? I've seen it reported in the paper and on TV. Stop and frisk had nothing to do with it...

Posted by Anonymous | July 30, 2007 11:20 AM

Posted on July 30, 2007 11:20

paul r:

Actually, I don't believe he fired the gun. As an aside, I'm told the gun in his possesion was an H&K USP .40 caliber which is perhaps the finest production handgun in the world (I know because I own a couple of them). I can't help wonder where he obtained such a nice piece of hardware!

As for the 85 shot controversy, the thing everyone has to bear in mind is that lethal force encounters tend to be fast, scary and nerve rattling affairs. When confronted by an armed assailant the body often goes into self defense mode by dumping adrenaline into the bloodstream thus bringing on involuntary physiological changes such as tunnel vision, loss of fine motor skills, auditory exclusion and time dilation to name a few.

So, the police officers who fired likely couldn’t hear their own shots (auditory exclusion) let alone any one else’s. Since the shooter is often concentrating solely on the threat (tunnel vision) he or she doesn’t see what is going on around them; all they know is that they are being confronted by lethal force (a man with a handgun) who may be shooting at them. In this incident, it sounds as though the 7 officers were spread out in three different locations making it impossible for them to fully understand where the shots were coming from; add in the very real possibility of “contagious” or “sympathy” fire and one can see how the shot total got so high. I’m not condoning their actions simply trying to put a little context around this issue.

Posted by paul r | July 30, 2007 1:37 PM

Posted on July 30, 2007 13:37

Anonymous:

You're referring to a different shooting a few weeks ago. Yesterday the guy they shot fired on them:
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_region/20070730_Returning_fire__Phila__police_kill_man__20.html

Posted by Anonymous | July 30, 2007 6:15 PM

Posted on July 30, 2007 18:15

paul r:

To the prior post, you are correct, in yesterday's shooting the officer was fired upon. However, since Simone's blog was about the Miller shooting, I assumed the comments in this section were also about the Miller shooting.

As for the more recent shooting, any time you point a gun at a police officer and pull the trigger, you should expect to be shot. The article indicates that the officer fired two shots, or an "accelerated pair", with at least one round finding center mass. Simone, any idea how far the officer was from the assailant? I assume they were pretty close to each other; the reason I ask is that this strikes me as pretty good marksmanship under some very adverse conditions.

Posted by paul r | July 30, 2007 9:20 PM

Posted on July 30, 2007 21:20

Jennie : Philly Teacher:

As I was reading this article, I guess what makes me really upset is not many people come home to eat with the police officers who had to live out either discharging thier weapon, or were on the scene to be a witness and are treated as if they commited a crime. My fiance is a poloice officer, and no I was not thrilled with the job decision because this city is brutal. I always plead the case for the sorry child who never had a chance or a dysfunctional background, but in reality no one pleads the case for the father or mother who goes home and had to witness a human being shot for becoming dangeous to our city! Don't call the police if you do not want their help. Help may consist of using their job "tools" that they were trained to use to control the situation that may get out of hand! Here is a question: If a 14 inch knife is coming your way and you are licsenced to carry; what would you do if you felt like your life was in danger? Please leave the race issues at home people; it is old and very 1970's! I thought the city of Philadelphia was the city of Brotherly love: we should love one another. Why is it whenever an African American male is shot, it is a race issue? If an African American police officer shoots an african american male it is the police are not doing their job, as soon as we find out it is a caucasian police officer it is a race issue! Seriously; does that make sense? Please take into consideration we are all humans; color is not a factor when someone is flying at you with a sharp object, but I am sure if it was you you would think of your family at home, and make the difficult moral decisiont to lose your life or see your family after a gruesome day at work!

Posted by Jennie : Philly Teacher | August 7, 2007 10:35 AM

Posted on August 7, 2007 10:35

paul raynolds:

Jennie, interesting post and an even more interesting question!

As a licensed permit holder (to carry a concealed firearm) and as an NRA Certified Firearms Instructor, let me take a stab at answering your question;

First, lethal force is always to be considered as a last resort and only when you reasonably believe that you are in imminent danger of death and/or grievous bodily harm. Second, if I can avoid a confrontation with an assailant I will. The best gunfight is the gunfight avoided.

However, when confronted with an edged weapon, the first determining factor of whether to employ lethal force is distance. 21 feet is the generally accepted minimum safe distance from an attacker with an edged weapon. If the assailant is closer than 21 feet, I would probably have drawn my firearm or at least be ready to draw. The second factor is intent, is he coming at me in a menacing manner or is he just standing around not really paying attention to me. If the latter, I’m leaving as quickly as possible without drawing his attention. If the former, my gun would be trained “center of mass” and I would, if possible, give him a verbal challenge (something like STOP and DROP THE KNIFE OR YOU WILL BE SHOT). Failure to obey this challenge would result in two shots (or an “accelerated pair”) to center of mass followed by a quick threat assessment and follow up shots of between 2 and 14 if necessary until the threat is eliminated.

This should not be confused with a police officers reaction because they cannot disengage from the threat as private citizens with conceal and carry permits are required to do. We are not auxiliary police officers and should not act like police officers. If we can avoid confrontation we are obligated to do so. Lastly, our firearms are for personal defense and lethal force is absolutely the last choice for us.

Posted by paul raynolds | August 7, 2007 2:07 PM

Posted on August 7, 2007 14:07

THINK:

POLICE OFFICERS ARE HUMANS LIKE YOU AND I. IN THIS DAY AND AGE WHEN THEIR IS NO REGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE. PUT YOURSELVES IN OUR PHILADELPHIA POLICE POSITIONS. THEY LEAVE HOME EVERY DAY TO DUE THE 8,10 OR 12 HOURS TO ENSURE AND PAY THEIR BILLS AND PROTECT US. WHY SHOULD THEY HAVE TO ALLOW SOMEONE TO POINT A GUN AT THEM AND NOT RESPOND. AS HUMANS I'D SURE THEY HAVE THE SAME FEELINGS YOU AND I HAVE WHEN WE LEAVE THE COMFORT OF OUR HOMES TO BEGAIN A JOURNEY THRU THE STREETS OF PHILA. THE ONE THING WE TRY NOT TO THINK ABOUT IS TOMMORROW IS NOT PROMISED TO NO ONE. HOWEVER WE STILL DESERVE TO LIVE IT. INSTEAD OF PHILADELPHIANS SAYING WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE CIVIL RIGHTS. HOW ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF EACH VICTIM THAT HAS BEEN VIOLATED.

Posted by THINK | August 28, 2007 12:50 PM

Posted on August 28, 2007 12:50

Antoine:

I'm so tired of the idiots in this city who are so outraged when the police try to do their job of protecting the citizens, but have nothing to say when it comes to the drug dealers and thugs who are terrorizing this city and its citizens and taking innocent lives. Philly cops should take a three month vacation. Let's see how you cop bashing idiots fair in this city then. Sounds to me like Philly needs a troop surge.

Posted by Antoine | September 11, 2007 11:28 PM

Posted on September 11, 2007 23:28

Spalva-me:

Posted by Spalva-me | February 29, 2008 7:33 PM

Posted on February 29, 2008 19:33

Spalva-ya:

Posted by Spalva-ya | February 29, 2008 7:33 PM

Posted on February 29, 2008 19:33

Spalva-ya:

Posted by Spalva-ya | February 29, 2008 7:33 PM

Posted on February 29, 2008 19:33

Spalva-ya:

Posted by Spalva-ya | February 29, 2008 7:34 PM

Posted on February 29, 2008 19:34

Spalva-om:

Posted by Spalva-om | February 29, 2008 7:48 PM

Posted on February 29, 2008 19:48

Freda:

annual produce of the land and labour of the country, to the real wealth and consumption of the neighbourhood. The capital of the merchant exchanges the

Posted by Freda | April 6, 2008 5:39 AM

Posted on April 6, 2008 05:39

fabiola-tr:

>
>
>
>
>
>

Posted by fabiola-tr | April 23, 2008 6:25 AM

Posted on April 23, 2008 06:25

fabiola-tr:

>
>
>
>
>
>

Posted by fabiola-tr | April 23, 2008 6:25 AM

Posted on April 23, 2008 06:25

Mary-nq:

Posted by Mary-nq | April 20, 2009 7:38 PM