Hard Call
You may have read last week that a young Air Force man, Roger Fortson, assigned to the 4th Special Operatons Squadron at Florida’s Hulrburt Field was shot by police after a domestic disturbance call was placed.
The Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office was responding to a disturbance between a man and woman in the apartment building, and deputies shot Fortson, who was Black, multiple times in the chest, according to police radio communications.
Normally I would write this off as a FAFO story – don’t smack the girl around, don’t have to take the consequences. But this one has some disturbing aspects.
“The circumstances surrounding Roger’s death raise serious questions that demand immediate answers from authorities, especially considering the alarming witness statement that the police entered the wrong apartment,” Crump said. “The narrative released by law enforcement, which falsely suggests that Roger posed a threat, is deeply troubling and inconsistent with the details provided by that witness: Roger was home alone, causing no disturbance, when his life was tragically cut short by law enforcement.”
Turns out the young airman was alone in his apartment, on a video call with his girlfriend. So no disturbance, no he/she dispute… and her story (she is the witness cited below) is pretty damning.
Fortson, according to the witness, asked, “Who is it?” But he didn’t receive an answer. After a subsequent “aggressive” second knock and seeing no one through the peephole, Fortson grabbed his legally owned gun, Crump detailed.
As Fortson was walking back to his living room, police entered the apartment and shot him.
“Don’t have anything further than a male and female; it’s all fourth party information from the front desk at the leasing office,” a deputy said on the radio.
A few minutes later, another deputy called in to report “shots fired, suspect down,” and called for emergency medical services.
“Multiple gunshot wounds to the chest, Black male,” another deputy chimes in shortly after. Fortson was shot six times, Crump said in his statement.Military.com
Now, Crump is an Al-Sharpton style lawyer who has been involved in many high-profile cases (Trayvon Martin and George Floyd, among others), and in this case he is playing a bit fast and loose with the facts – police video says the sheriff identified himself clearly twice and Fortson acknowledged. However, the video also shows Fortson turning away to walk into his apartment after answering the door. The sheriff’s office says the address was correct. So not everything is as described.
The deputy takes the elevator to the fourth floor and knocks on a door three times. The apartment number “1401” is visible in the footage. He announces himself twice, saying, “Sheriff’s office, open the door.” There is nothing heard on the footage from inside the apartment. (Emphasis added – ed.)
Within seconds of the apartment’s door opening, the deputy says “step back” and is then seen firing his weapon. Fortson is seen standing at the door with his hands down and what appears to be a lowered firearm in his right hand. He immediately falls to the floor as the deputy fires. At least five shots are heard. CNN
This is a tough one. I understand the mentality that says “Gun!!Shoot!” but there also has to be a threat, and I am not seeing that. Not a fan of Crump’s by any means but he may indeed be the blind pig who has found an acorn this time. Did the deputy do ‘black man-gun-assumed threat’ in his head? All I know, is that at this point this does not appear to be a 100% good shoot, and it has cost us the life of a presumably motivated and trained service member. Hope someone knows more about this.
Category: Air Force, Dick Stepping
So…wrong address or correct address?
Correct address. And in the BC footage a female in the complex tells the officer the same apartment number. She is someone they need to be talking to.
Best practices for responding to a DV call where a neighbor calls is to listen outside the residence for a minute or two for sounds of a conflict; either verbal or physical before knocking. This also may establish probable cause in case the officer has to make forced entry.
Answering the door with a gun in your hand is something a lot of people do in rough neighborhoods. Normally the gun hand is behind the door.
I don’t see this as being a good shoot. A good self defense threat shoot indicates that the target had means, opportunity and intent. Having a gun in your hand down by your side doesn’t demonstrate intent.
Here we have 2/3.
I answer the door at night with a sidearm in my hand and I do not live in a rough neighborhood.
Given the roving gangs of illegal alien home invaders that hit nice houses in nice neighborhoods these days I’d say answering the door at night when you aren’t expecting anyone you know well is a risky proposition.
Have you never done the “action is faster than reaction drill?” A gun in the hand is a deadly threat, regardless where it’s pointed.
Correct, the gun was method and opportunity. Intent still isn’t there.
Confronting a uniformed cop who has ordered you to open your door with a gun doesn’t show some level of intent in your mind?
Are you privy to dead guy’s state of mind or what he knew and heard?
Means, opportunity, intent- that’s what I was taught and practiced in the field.
Mason, what jurisdiction did you work in when you could shoot anyone for having possession of a firearm?
I’m not saying I’d have personally shot immediately, but I am saying it’s a lawful use of deadly force given what the officer knew at the time.
Cop knocks and announces, and dude confronts him square on with a visible pistol in his hand. The cop wasn’t wrong to perceive a threat, especially given that the call is about a heated domestic.
I always told myself I’d give an armed subject one chance before I shot, just to avoid shooting a good guy by chance. For good or bad, I can tell you that’s exactly what I did in the field when confronted with that scenario. Thankfully I didn’t get shot, but I very easily could have, all because I gave that warning.
Only winner in this case will be the lawer. Hard call, indeed.
Very true
2 most dangerous activities for cops: traffic stops & domestic calls. These 2 go sideways in a heartbeat and cops & civilians get killed. He wasn’t shot because he was black. He was shot because the cops saw a gun in what can be a what can be a VERY dangerous situation. If the address was correct, was this a case of SWATTING? That’s why people make the phony calls hoping something bad will happen.
“That’s why people make the phony calls hoping something bad will happen”
And that’s why people answer their door armed.
Right address/wrong address, you bang on someone’s door
aggressively I don’t care who the fuck you say you are.
That almost sounds like a justification. The airman got shot because that cop valued his own life more than the life of the citizen he was supposed to protect. Thats why I cringe at this whole “Back the Blue” thing. Too many officers see a gun and panic, and end up shooting the wrong people. That’s not something I want to back.
And Lefty asshats think LESS training (via Defunding da poh-lease) will help the problem.
MORE training is needed. Especially range time and scenario Sims.
I was just at Hurlburt Field looking at an MH-53/0928 on display. A really nice Air Park. I remember hearing a lot of sirens in Ft Walton Beach one day last week. Disturbing too think the cops were doing some bullshit like this. The worst part of this will be the cops will receive qualified immunity and nothing will happen. They will do there own investigation of the situation and determine their officer acted appropriately. Let’s hope they had their body cameras turned on. This is bullshit!
Bodycam footage is available.
Saw the video. Was no reason to shoot.
…door opens….deputy yells step back, and shoots….then he says put the gun down!
So what did the lady in the lobby hear and who was she talking to that sounded “real scared on the phone”? Was there a female even listed as an occupant?
Would you come to the door with a gun in your hand if there’s a cop outside announcing his presence (repeatedly)?
Do the crooks holler “police”?
Yup.
They use fake badges too. Sometimes they use a badge shaped wad of aluminum foil in a wallet. Through a door peep in bad light, it looks real enough. And realistic fakes are available online. (And not just fake kitchy old west crap)
If you think there’s a fake cop standing on the other side of the door waiting to rob you, then why the hell would you open the door?
There is a very good chance that wad of hat material has scorch marks and burnt fetty on it
Maybe they should have tried a little more of a less aggressive investigation like double checking the the apartment number and calling the phone associated with it. The number would have been busy but that would explain why no immediate answer at the door. Isn’t this the department that had an officer hose down the area with pistol fire when an acorn fell on his cruiser? Seems to me this could have been avoided with a little more caution.
“Muh training kicked in!”
Everything I have heard and seen so far in this case indicates that it was a bad shooting. Regardless of whether it was the right or wrong address/apartment the LEO has a requirement to identify himself and notify the “suspect” to drop the gun.
Shoot first and ask questions later is not a legal option.
The LEO did identify himself, and there is no requirement to tell the suspect to drop the gun first. Deadly force may be used without warning.
Not quite.
Which part are you disagreeing with? He clearly identifies himself. That much should not be in dispute.
Tenn v. Garner says, officers should give a warning before using deadly force when “feasible.” Deadly force does not need a verbal warning.
Did Fortson actually hear that identification?
We’ll never know. What we do know is you can hear the cop giving loud, clear announcements after knocking. Cop even stands in front of the door a couple of times, and would have been visible through a peephole.
You are assuming the gun was in sight when the door was opened. He may have had it behind him initially and then brought it into view, even without the intent to use it. The fact that the gun may have been in motion during that two second or less interval between door opening and shots fired leads me to give the police officer the benefit of the doubt in this case. That may change, of course, as new information comes out.
“Shoot first and ask questions later is not a legal option.”
I think that depends on the circumstances.
According to the info supplied to the SO, correct address and apartment. Now was the call some kind of “swatting”, prank or deliberate misinformation? Did the neighbor assume since the person inside was using a louder voice (most of us do raise our volume a bit on the phone now, especially on skype type calls) that there was a domestic situation? From what I have heard the girlfriend has “modified” her statement. She originally said he said the police were at the door before going to open it. Now she isn’t.
Next question is, once the door banging and announcements have been made, the resident shows up with a firearm in hand, just how long are the LEO’s required to wait until determining there is a valid threat? Do they have to wait until the weapon is pointed at them point blank, a round is fired at them, or they are on the way to the ground after being shot after being ambushed by a person with a gun at the door?
Monday morning quarterbacking is real freaking easy compared to having been a principal involved in the situation. Now why would a person show up to answer the door with a gun in hand after loud knocking and loud announcements it was the Sheriff Deputy at the door? Especially since there was a peep hole in the door.
“Story sez” (and you can take that for what it’s worth), no announcement HEARD INSIDE of who was at the door, and NOTHING SEEN when looked through the peephole.
Thing is, there was only one person inside, He’s dead so refuses to give a statement. So where did that claim come from? Oh yeah, someone who was not there.
“NOTHING SEEN”
Probably because the police officer was standing to the side, out of the field of view
It not illegal to have and hold a gun in your home. It was not pointed at the deputy. The deputy never gave any commands to drop the weapon. No weapon was pointed at the deputy. It’s not a war zone, you can’t just start shooting cause you see a gun that’s not pointed at you. Cop was displaying his destain for armed citizens and hoping to get a free kill. This deputy needs the death penalty. That was premeditated murder.
Jimbo’s right. If he’d pointed the gun at the cops, then yeah, maybe. As such, it sounds like a good man was ended for no good reason.
Have you ever looked up the definition of premeditated murder? You use that term but I don’t think it means what you think it means.
Premeditated to me means you intentionally decided to do something. The cop had that moment before shooting to see the gun not pointed at him. When all his training told him not to shoot. He knew in that instant there was no threat. That was murder.
Nope.
Nobody can make a logical decision in that amount of time. The officer was reacting poorly to a incorrectly perceived threat out of fear. He was acting on adrenaline, training and muscle memory.
That’s not what “premeditated” means. The officer’s training, if it’s like any of the myriad training I’ve had on the topic, was followed here. This is a literal textbook lethal force scenario. He did not know “in that instant there was no threat.” In fact, all the evidence indicates that he did think there was a threat.
You make it seem like you think that the cop that’s casually walking up to the apartment in the middle of a sunny afternoon was just looking for a guy to kill. Does the cop seem the least bit jumpy, edgy, or trigger-happy? The cop is the picture of calm until he’s presented with a gun who pulls a gun on a cop.
You seem to have the ability to read people’s minds.
How are you able to tell this officer has a distain for armed citizens?
You also don’t seem to understand the difference between Homicide and Murder.
You’ll never hear of a “Justifiable Murder”.
Homicide is one person killing another person.
Murder is one person killing another person with malice.
In order to prove murder you have to be able to prove malice and intent. You can’t charge 1st Degree Murder because you feel like that’s what’s warranted, you can only charge what you can prove beyond a doubt.
Unless you’re able to dig in with your ESP and determine exactly what this officer was thinking at the very instant he pulled the trigger….
“That was premeditated murder.”
BS
Even in Somalia in 1993, rules of engagement stated unless an armed Somali pointed a weapon at you, you could not fire. This was Florida, not Mogadishu.
I’ll play monday morning quarterback. “Put the weapon down” is absolutely not to be preceded by multiple shots fired.
That’s fight or flight for you. As you learn in ground school, you can navigate, aviate, or communicate. You can do one well, two reasonably well, but if you try all three at once, it tends to fall apart rather quickly.
Cop’s looking for cover (navigating), responding to the threat (aviating), and communicating (yelling). His brain can only do so much at once. His nervous system dropped the talking, because in that moment, it was the third on the list of three priorities.
“I’ll play monday morning quarterback.”
Me too. He had a gun in his hand, and given only the information on the videotape and the one second the police officer had to decide, I would have shot him. Been there.
No more career for you.
Name the ONLY organized employer who does NOT have to have insurance.
Name Pleaz?
The Federal Government.
Fail to see how that means anything here. Local police agencies carry tons of insurance.
In my line of work, I have frequent encounters with law enforcement officers, from multiple local agencies. Some I trust. Some I would be extremely anxious with if we met in an off the job encounter, because I don’t want to end up like this airman.
We (well, they) asked for it… Hyper vigilant police who have suffered from lack of training, to include ‘shoot, don’t shoot’ scenarios and de-escalation techniques.
If someone knocks aggressively on my door, I’m answering with a gun. Well, to be honest, given the prevalence of both impersonators and trigger-happy police, I’m finding a flanking position to confirm or deny who’s really at the door. If it’s questionable, maybe a quick 911 call to confirm is in order. If it seems legit, maybe I disarm myself and become very vocally compliant.
I feel for both parties in this incident. Obviously, the young Airman was unnecessarily cut down in the prime of his life for the “crime” of wanting to protect himself. He showed no belligerence and seemed to pose no threat to the officer other than having an evil gun. The deputy saw a gun in hand and instantly used lethal force to eliminate what he perceived as a threat. The last I checked, merely brandishing a firearm isn’t worthy of execution.
Law enforcement is a dangerous job, but there are inherent advantages to wearing a badge. For one, almost all cops now wear body armor to protect their vitals. For another, Team Blue usually responds in force, or at least backup is a radio call away for all but the most rural and/or tiniest of departments. For yet another, proper modern procedure seems to be multiple cops, one or two with less-lethal (Taser, bean bag, etc.), and the others with service pistols, carbines, and shotguns. North Carolina proved that a single criminal could take out multiple cops, but a gun at the side is much less of a threat than an active shooter engaging police and the public. Bad shoot, in my opinion.
North Carolina, Memphis, DC, and others; that is just so far this year.
Dallas, New Orleans, lots of incidents where several police were shot and often killed doing relatively innocuous things like parade duty or serving a warrant for animal cruelty.
But as noted, this doesn’t appear to be a good shoot.
“Blind pig who has found an acorn,” apt description; but of course this is the same sheriff’s department that mag dumped on a falling acorn.
So that means all of the folks on that department are incompetent. Here is another take on your assertion.
Some think all Veterans are a danger to society, After all a Marine Vet. killed President Kennedy, an Army Vet. blew up the Oklahoma building and the “acorn Deputy” is also a Vet with multiple tours in Afghanistan (even if it is said he had no direct combat experience). It seems pretty obvious using your kind of logic that we should be putting Veterans in mental health facilities. Would you approve of that kind of tar brushing?
Poor training obviously, weak leadership probably. If you have one obvious failure in your unit, you can blame the individual or you can suspect that your training is not having the proper effect. Once you have two obvious failures it is much harder to blame the individuals, and much more likely that training and leadership is the issue.
I lived in Fayetteville for a number of years as well as FWB, and since retiring and NOT living in a military town I’m struck by how much better the Police dept in my medium sized Tennessee city is than anything I saw in off post towns.
Probably because in the off post towns “everyone they deal with is a trained killer”. Sorry, just couldn’t resist.
Thank you for catching the reference!
“Jackson was unharmed by the incident but said it left him traumatized”.
*Snort*
No shit.
It probably also left him richer.
Here is another Domestic call. Keep in mind the guy had a perfectly lawful right to be in his home and armed as has been said here. Like the subject of this thread the Officer was also holstered at the time contact was made so was not an immediate threat to the male part of the domestic call. Should the Officer have used de-escalation techniques, waited until the shotgun was pointed at him before firing?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx5nQjJY0gM
What are your thoughts on this one?
There are no winners in these, only losers all the way around.
It’s why we call these scenarios “Awful, but lawful.” The officer will be judged by what he knew in the moment, which is why this will be ruled a clean shoot. You can’t judge the guy with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.
I really get pissed when a fellow veteran gets killed for no reason. I’ve made split decisions in life and so have the rest of us. Training is crucial to figuring out threats. Cops go through training and face scenarios just like this. You can’t shoot unless there’s a threat. It’s pretty basic.
Anybody with a gun in their hand is a threat. That is the whole point of carrying a gun.
This isn’t true. Potential threat, maybe, actual threat, possibly.
“This isn’t true.”
Actually, it is true. Determining what is threatening is subjective. I see a stranger with a gun in his hand, I feel a threat exists; that is a true fact. You do not feel a threat exists; that, too, is a true fact.
Anyone who picks up a gun should realize that other people may, rightly or wrongly, think of them as a threat, no matter how skillful, knowledgeable, and pure of heart they may be.
Sad.
With all the modern camera systems, peepholes etc. and still
mistakes are made I propose a new entry door system.
I call it “Claymore Door”.
No need to get out of bed. Comes with two activators and 100ft
of wiring for each. Warning decals in both english and gibberish.
Authentic frontier gibberish?
The body cam tells the real story.
First of all, the deputy was given the wrong apartment number.
He knocked a couple of times and announced who he was. The airman came to the door with a GUN IN HIS HAND. The fact that he did not have it pointed at the deputy does not matter, he knew it was the police, or could have taken steps to find out. To follow the advice of Massad Ayoob, he could have placed the gun in a back pocket, out of sight of the officer.
However, when anyone answers their door to a police officer with a gun in their hand, they cannot expect a good outcome, and the courts have almost always ruled in favor of the officer.
A 4th Circuit Court ruling in 1996 [Elliot v Leavitt, 640] held that “[The Constitution does not require a police officer waits until a suspect shoots to confirm that a serious threat of harm exists, and no court can expect any human being to remain passive to an active threat to his or her life…”
Further, in Graham v Connor [USSC, 1989] the court concluded that; “…the ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight” The Reasonable Man Standard…”would a reasonable and prudent man under the same circumstances, act in the same way as a reasonable, trained, and prudent officer given the same knowledge the officer had at the time?”
^This^
If you’re answering the door to a cop after he’s announced himself more than once, then you should probably get the gun out of your hand.
Its not a great argument. If I, 5JC private citizen, go over to your house and you, Mason, answer the door with a pistol in your hand I don’t have license to shoot you out of self defense. That would be unreasonable.
You might say; “he announced himself as a cop”, but we will never know if dead guy even heard him, much less believed him. We have no idea if dead guy knew or even suspected that there was a police officer at the door.
We do know that there was no reason for the police to be there as there was no domestic disturbance and dead guy wasn’t breaking any law. If he was face timing with the GF he very well may not have heard someone talking outside.
People who like to play with guns need to realize that, right or wrong, there may be consequences and act accordingly. For one thing, some other guy (in this case a police officer) who is also armed may be a moron.
We might know that now. It was not known at the time. With the information the officer had available, how would a reasonable officer respond? That’s the legal standard he’ll be held to.
True, we’ll never know if the airman heard the cop’s loud, clear announcements. The cop did everything he could to make it clear who was outside the door.
That wasn’t my point. My point was that the dead guy wasn’t aware that the police would have been called or even have a reason for being there.
Except make himself able to be seen thru the peep hole in the door.
I have done the police shoot don’t shoot video clip training with a laser firing Glock copy. The bottom line is that if police confront you and there is a gun in your hand, they will likely start shooting you before you can utter a word.
I never cease to marvel at the attitude of open carry enthusiasts. They seem to live in a world where the second amendment and their pure hearts are a guarantee that nothing bad will happen. Must be some sort of “white privilege”.
Ummm open carry has nothing to do with this. Private citizen in his house, try harder cop lover.
I quote myself from a previous comment—-
“Anyone who picks up a gun should realize that other people may, rightly or wrongly, think of them as a threat, no matter how skillful, knowledgeable, and pure of heart they may be”
“…cop lover”
Is that supposed to be an insult? Take your own advice—“try harder”. And you obviously have not read all my previous comments.
Because confronting a police officer with a gun dramatically raises the stakes of the encounter.
One would think that is a matter of common sense.
I wouldn’t call this resuscitating a zombie thread, but just saw the news that the cop that was involved in the shooting has been fired.
I would believe that that would open them to a civil suit
https://ktvz.com/news/national-world/cnn-national/2024/05/31/florida-deputy-who-shot-airman-in-his-home-has-been-fired-for-using-unreasonable-deadly-force-sheriff-says/