Deputy shoots, kills man armed with rifle2 responded to call about stabbing By Nita Birmingham (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Sunday, January 6, 2008
MEGGETT — A Charleston County Sheriff's deputy shot and killed a man who twice fired a rifle and refused to drop the firearm in an encounter Saturday night on Storage Road. The Charleston County Coroner's Office did not release the name of the 34-year-old man. Sheriff Al Cannon said the man did not shoot at the two deputies but fired into the woods. The names of the deputies also were not released. The incident began when deputies were dispatched just after 5 p.m. to a possible stabbing on Storage Road. The male caller, who was on a cell phone, was irate and first said he'd been stabbed in the arm, then said he'd been stabbed in the heart, Cannon said. Deputies didn't find anyone stabbed, but further checking of the person associated with the cell phone number led deputies to 4849 Storage Road around 6 p.m., Cannon said. That's where deputies encountered a "very agitated" man standing outside a mobile home, Cannon said. "He was screaming and hollering. He had a rifle and fired it into the woods." The deputies ordered the man to drop the rifle, but he refused and fired into the woods again in a different direction, Cannon said. A deputy fired one shot, he added. Two people who were in the mobile home were being interviewed, but Cannon said it was unknown if they witnessed the shooting. Deputies were still investigating Saturday night to determine if the original call about the possible stabbing was made by the armed man, Cannon said. It's likely that alcohol was involved, he said. The sheriff's deputies, whose names were not released, have been placed on paid administrative leave, which is standard procedure in an officer-involved shooting, but Cannon said it appears their actions were consistent with policy. The State Law Enforcement Division is investigating. Reach Nita Birmingham at 745-5858. |
Article tools
| |||
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 28 comment(s)
Posted by Creeker01 on January 6, 2008 at 2:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Your comment implies that the Sheriff's Office would condone an illegal shooting and killing, rather than hang out to dry a Deputy who has done something wrong.
Al said it "appears their actions were consistent with policy". The article says SLED is investigating.
Your inference is indicative of a person with little experience and much less perspective on these matters.
Please return to your fictionalised, fact-based, cowboy drama.
Posted by pirate42 on January 6, 2008 at 5:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Policy
the man shot into the woods were the deputys behind there car for protection! dam Why not use there shot guns with rubber bulletts all is this police today have a license to kill sad we dont have educated police anymore...
Posted by pithy on January 6, 2008 at 7:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
PalmettoMan and pirate42 your comments prove that our society continues to be influenced and "educated" by what they see on Law and Order and CSI. Can you not wait to pass judgement on the people who are sworn to protect and serve, until all of the facts are in? Instead of criticizing, maybe you should ask yourself - what would you do if someone who was "agitated, screaming and hollering" AND holding and shooting a rifle - would you wait until the bullet hit YOU then say "oops"?
Posted by thatslife23 on January 6, 2008 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well put pithy. Its good to know that not everyone finds CSI to be real. This is real life people!!!!
Posted by finder on January 6, 2008 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
pirate....did you ever stop to think that the deputies may have been in the woods?
Posted by ColdBeer on January 6, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Perfectly justified shooting. Good job Charleston County!
Posted by JC on January 6, 2008 at 9:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Your lucky DH that the bullet didn't go through the woods into your house or hit your child playing there. Bleeding hearts kill me. What, you expect them to wait until he turns the gun on them, or whoever was in his house, or how about the neighborhor's house? Drunken idiots shooting guns calls for such force and I'm glad they shot him before he shot someone. I'm sure you would have something to say about the officers if they let that happen now wouldn't you? Support our police officers. Don't criticize them every chance you get..you may need them one day.
Posted by ForPnC on January 6, 2008 at 9:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Kudos to the Deputy for taking a perp off the street!
Posted by moonpie on January 6, 2008 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Perfectly justified shooting. Good job Charleston County!
Absolutely coldbeer! If the po po tell you to stop, drop your weapon, etc,etc you might want to do it as they will shoot your deserving butt.
Posted by SCVOTER on January 6, 2008 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As a gun owner and CPW carrier...I agree with Huffman. If these officers were not shot at or had the gun pointed at them, the were not justified in the shooting. There are numerous ways for police to apprehend a delusional suspect.
Guns should always be a last resort. Kill only when absolutely necessary, but always be willing to take that step if needed.
Posted by madamvoter on January 6, 2008 at 10:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The article says the shooting took place around 6:00pm. that means it was already dark. Did the person that called 911 explain that the armed man was only shooting into the woods? Could the deputies acually see the armed man?? Were they positive that the gun shots were not intended for them? Could they positivly --at that minute --know he was shooting into the woods????
Maybe the officers should have asked, "Are you shooting at us or are you just shooting into the woods? We need to know before we open fire."
Posted by pithy on January 6, 2008 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
scvoter - just how would YOU apprehend a delusional "agitated, screaming and hollering" suspect holding and shooting a gun? Ask for the gun "pretty please"?
Posted by mac0cm4 on January 6, 2008 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am sure the shooting will be deemed legal.
As is typical those who second guess the actions of the LEO's on scene have no idea what goes into police work, nor do they know exactly what transpired on scene, or immediately before they got there either. I'd like to see some of you go out and do what the police officers do on a daily basis to keep you and your families safe.
Posted by finder on January 6, 2008 at 12:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
DH if your armed with a calculator that's all you should be armed with. Let me point a gun in your direction......are still willing to play the odds?
You sound intelligent, just lacking common sense
Bet you still play the lottery don't you. Even tho you know the odds of winning are a million to one.
Posted by outrage on January 6, 2008 at 12:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Doug Huffman - "The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense".
You said it, thanks for calling yourself out!
SCVOTER. "there are numerous ways for police to apprehend a delusional suspect." Yeah, Call in SCVOTER(to back up Doug Huffman, who will bring him down with wisdom and quotes) andPirate42 with all of his wonderful Toys.
Posted by SCVOTER on January 6, 2008 at 12:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If honest citizens don't use guns properly we are just giving fuel to the anti-gun ownership fire.
Yes Outrage...the police should use their "toys" before they use their guns...I thought the police operated on an "escalation of violence" theory.
Posted by outrage on January 6, 2008 at 1:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, they do and this sounds like the reached the level of lethal force. As far as the toys, Capstun has an effective range of 5 to 7 feet(depending on the wind), ASP(baton)- which unless you can throw it well is useless, Taser - up to 20 feet, but you have to get both leads to stick! Then, a hand gun or shotgun. Now SWAT has some toys, but they did't have time to call them! Sounds like these guys had a tough quick decision, and I don't think they are issued a calculator.
Posted by jammer on January 6, 2008 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
when firing a gun you must always be keenly aware of what your backstop is, meaning what exactly is behind or in those woods ahead of time
chances are pretty good that there were deputies in those woods flanking the situation, which means whether he knew it or not he was probably shooting at PEOPLE
not to mention the houses behind those woods or kids that could have been playing in them, I know I ran in miles of these woods playing around as a kid
anyone carelessly shooting a weapon around in a neighborhood should be stopped before they purposely or accidentally harm/kill an innocent person by whatever means necessary to eliminate the threat... yes that means shoot him if he doesn't stop when you ask, with a real bullet so it will really stop him
SCVoter there's a giant difference in you as a citizen defending yourself and the sheriff's people defending an entire area
as another CWP and gun owner I totally agree with what they did, Kudo's to the CCSO for neutralizing the situation as expediently as possible without harm to innocents
I have family that lives out that way and I would rather not be reading in the paper this morning that a stray bullet had struck one of them...
Posted by ChrisPia on January 6, 2008 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Great Job,and Great Policework Charleston county Sheriffs Office.....Police,Drop your weapon is an order that law abiding citizens should recognize...Thank You for protecting the Citizens as well as yourselves...
Posted by ImplantedYankee on January 6, 2008 at 6:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't know what to make of all this because it doesn't sound like all the facts are in. Those that vilify the posters who suspect police wrong-doing for that very reason should consider that themselves. As for what makes a legal shooting, consider this: It was legal for several armed and armor-clad members of the North Charleston police to shoot and kill an already subdued mentally-retarded man whose only weapon was a pocket knife and whose only crime was taking a piece of lunchmeat from a supermarket counter. Had he killed someone, his mental state would have made it illegal to sentence him to death in a court of law, but the North Charleston police were permitted by law to do so in the middle of a public street in broad daylight.
Unlike many posters, I'm cognizant that, without further information, it's impossible to determine the nature of the shooting. At the same time, however, it's ridiculous to use the standard of what is legal to decide what is right and wrong.
Posted by outrage on January 6, 2008 at 6:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I Y - Check your facts! Your "spinning" out of control!
Posted by ImplantedYankee on January 6, 2008 at 7:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
outrage -- you failed to address a single point with that post and added nothing to the discussion except for bad grammar.
Posted by CharlestonsFinest on January 6, 2008 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Doug, why don't you come over to my house and we will do a little demonstration. I will prove to you that you are an idiot. You know nothing of action/reaction. Please present a gun in my presence...
I Y....you are just as intelligentas the rest of his family...
Posted by svESinKW on January 6, 2008 at 8:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's all well and good to talk about how y'all would stand firm and calm in the presence of a unknown person firing a rifle in indiscriminate directions -- and how you would aim at his knees or something like that -- until you are actually there. The deputy involved had no idea where the next shot was going -- it could have toward him, or worse, an innnocent bystander whom he was there to protect. Just because the first two shots went into woods doesn't mean the next one would have. While he may have been aiming at the perp's knees, that's a very small target to hit at night while a person is moving around. I know for a fact that the deputy involved would have much preferred hitting the perp's knees and taking him into custody over what actually happened.
In short, don't judge anyone in this situation until you have walked at mile in their shoes. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE IN THAT SITUATION and until you do, you should NOT PASS JUDGMENT.
By the way, I am also a gun owner and CWP holder. The CWP doesn't make a person an expert -- it simply gives one permission to carry a firearm.
Posted by oldred on January 6, 2008 at 9:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am a x-police officer / gun owner / CWP carrier. This so called perp has a name, I also understand he is a single father of a 9 yr old young lady. I also understand that he may have been under the influence and angry, but no one on this list know more than what a tv or paper writes. Would it change you opinion if you knew he was well respected person in our neighborhood, a city leader having a bad day, or would the shooting seem justified if you knew he was not only leaving to go back into his own home, that the Constitution guarantees, with his legal firearm or the fact that he was shot in the back. Anyone who has a CWP knows about a person removing the threat does not deserve to be shot in the back. But in this case it seem that leaving got this man killed by the police. Shot in the back, not where is the threat?
Posted by AndyT on January 7, 2008 at 3:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by pirate42 on January 6, 2008 at 5:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Policy
the man shot into the woods were the deputys behind there car for protection! dam Why not use there shot guns with rubber bulletts all is this police today have a license to kill sad we dont have educated police anymore...
Really???? Is this person for real? Talking about being educated and the post makes absolutely no sense.
Posted by oldred on January 6, 2008 at 9:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am a x-police officer / gun owner / CWP carrier. This so called perp has a name, I also understand he is a single father of a 9 yr old young lady. I also understand that he may have been under the influence and angry, but no one on this list know more than what a tv or paper writes. Would it change you opinion if you knew he was well respected person in our neighborhood, a city leader having a bad day, or would the shooting seem justified if you knew he was not only leaving to go back into his own home, that the Constitution guarantees, with his legal firearm or the fact that he was shot in the back. Anyone who has a CWP knows about a person removing the threat does not deserve to be shot in the back. But in this case it seem that leaving got this man killed by the police. Shot in the back, not where is the threat?
Ex-copper (oldred) that is interesting. You were a cop? Where? La La Land! The well respected citizen fired a RIFLE at officers. He was ordered to drop his weapon (RIFLE) which he chose NOT to listen to them. They did what was necessary. You said that you are a CWP carrier. That doesn't mean too much. You attended a class!!! WOW! You can't carry your weapon into WAL-Mart! If it means anything, I don't think he will have any more bad days...... Monday morning quarterback that!!! OUTSTANDING JOB DEPUTIES!!!!!!
Posted by meggettcitizen on January 7, 2008 at 6:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you, CCSO. If you dont listen to authority, authority has the right to take you down. This should be an eye opener to all those that like to live the criminal life.
Posted by outrage on January 7, 2008 at 7:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I Y - Mr. Wilder had a screwdriver and attempted to stab the officers. You are "spinning" out of control. Thanks, for the grammer correction. I Y - Are you from NY?