MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Wednesday, August 20, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 83.0° F  Mostly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:38 am

Francis Di Domizio wrote:
jonnygothispen wrote:Mr. Heenan hadn't pulled out any weapons, and it's unlikely he was "reaching" for one since he didn't have any.


He had reached for one, it just happened to be in officer Heimness's hands at the time.

jonnygothispen wrote:But in ALL fairness, Mr. Heimness had other options.

Pure conjecture on your part with no basis any similar experience.

jonnygothispen wrote:Mr. Heimness could have: remained disengaged until he had help in wrestling Paulie down, or stepped back, and whipped out the pepper spray, or shot him in non fatal areas


Disengaging takes two people, if Mr. Heenan continues to advance on Officer Heimness it's tough to disengage. 5 feet is not nearly enough space to safely secure a firearm (especially when someone is trying to take it away), and pull out pepper spray. Pepper spray can also easily end up effecting the wielder as well at close ranges. Furthermore aiming at and hitting a "non-lethal" location of the leg when the target leg is moving is not quite as simple as taking
jonnygothispen wrote:pot shots at a beat up Yugo 25 years ago.


One of the important theories of use of a firearm is knowing what is behind your target and not causing rounds to go ricocheting off in unknown directions. Your are far more likely to hit when you aim for the center of mass and far less likely to have rounds go somewhere unintended. It's horrible that Mr. Heenan is dead, but it would be far more horrible if his behavior had lead to anyone else dying (including Officer Heimness).

jonnygothispen wrote:He can also say whatever he wants about it. No one but him knows how accurate that really is either.


You keep making this claim, seeming to forget that there was a witness there who also gave a statement.

jonnygothispen wrote:any time something like this happens it should be closely scrutinized


And it always is. After which armchair cops always come out and say why the cop was wrong and how they would have handled a situation they have no experience or training in so much better.
Heimness says Paulie grabbed for his gun. That's a rock solid alibi, if true. However, even if Paulie had "grabbed" for his gun, which we now know isn't true, they separated, another officer had just pulled up, and Paulie was not lunging at Heimness. Paulie's a skinny dude. Heimness successfully separated likely because Paulie was so drunk and not much of a brawler to begin with. Also, 5 to 6 feet is a decent distance. Heimness has made poor decisions in similar situations.

I based what I said on what we knew at the time. I also based it on my own experiences in situations like this. You based your opinion on your own conjecture, and false statements.

RE: Heimness originally said "He grabbed for my gun." That changed in at least one later story to, "He grabbed my arm" w/o the "grabbed my gun." I wonder, why mention "grabbed my arm" when "grabbed my gun" will do unless he actually grabbed the arm with the gun, and Heimness reacted out of fear or aggression? Which did he grab, the arm or the gun? Or neither since he was flailing and swatting at Heimness like completely wasted drunks often do?

Madison is a better place because of Bill Lueders.
Last edited by jonnygothispen on Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3078
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jjoyce » Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:38 am

jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:40 am

jjoyce wrote:An interesting development here:

http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/artic ... icle=38695
Yeah, exactly, and thanks for all the condescending BS.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3078
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:47 am

Francis Di Domizio wrote:
jonnygothispen wrote:He can also say whatever he wants about it. No one but him knows how accurate that really is either.


You keep making this claim, seeming to forget that there was a witness there who also gave a statement.

jonnygothispen wrote:any time something like this happens it should be closely scrutinized


And it always is. After which armchair cops always come out and say why the cop was wrong and how they would have handled a situation they have no experience or training in so much better.
You must have no idea how often cops lie. It's pretty routine. They add "facts" to make their case more solid all the time.

I'd rather be an armchair quarterback than a water boy apologist before knowing what happened
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3078
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby earlfoss » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:08 am

Sad for everyone involved.
Last edited by earlfoss on Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
earlfoss
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:32 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby Meade » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:19 am

"I feel terrible that I called the police," [Megan O'Malley] said. "I wouldn't call them again."

Okay. So you feel terrible. Fine. Stephen Heimsness feels terrible. Bill Lueders feels terrible. Jason Joyce feels terrible. Everyone feels terrible.

The question is, why did you call the police? And did you know, before retiring for the night, that your front door - the door Paul Heenan haplessly entered - was unlocked?

Also, if it's true that you would not call the police again, how will you protect yourself and your family from an intruder?
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:21 am

earlfoss wrote:
This neighbor is contradicting the statements of 3 witnesses. 2 police officers and the homeowner.
The neighbor is the homeowner. The other cop didn't see it. Cops lie a lot, especially when they're in trouble. That's a fact.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3078
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby earlfoss » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:26 am

People who aren't cops lie a lot too.
earlfoss
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:32 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby earlfoss » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:28 am

jonnygothispen wrote:
earlfoss wrote:
This neighbor is contradicting the statements of 3 witnesses. 2 police officers and the homeowner.
The neighbor is the homeowner. The other cop didn't see it. Cops lie a lot, especially when they're in trouble. That's a fact.


Sorry I slipped, you're right that WAS the homeowner. My mistake.
earlfoss
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:32 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:32 am

earlfoss wrote:People who aren't cops lie a lot too.
True, but O'Malley did nothing wrong and has no reason to lie. Heimness seems to have over-reacted, and has a reason to lie, embellish, or exaggerate.

When I first read about this, I thought we'd never know what actually happened. I'm grateful to Bill Lueders for putting himself on the line once again, and getting the rest of this story out. I'm not sure why it's like this, but it seems like you're almost always the subject of criticism when you stick up for those with no voice.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3078
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby david cohen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:09 pm

Well everyone is lawyered up. The officer won't be criminally prosecuted. He might be sued civilly. The homeowner is clearly worried that he might be dragged into this on a liability issue (leaving keys in door, etc.). Anything Lueders writes isn't going to be taken as fact by a court of law because he isn't a witness- he's just providing another perspective that some will claim is prejudiced. The fact still remains that if Paul Heenan had complied with the police order, at gunpoint, to get on the ground, this thread would not exist. So sad.
david cohen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:48 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:43 pm

... nor would this thread exist if Heimness responded in a more rational way. And it wouldn't have become a bigger issue if the DA and police statements weren't misleading, at best. Which, if they hadn't lied about what happened via omission, it wouldn't have become a story worthy of another "perspective," if you believe that simply telling the truth is merely a "perspective."
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3078
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby david cohen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 1:28 pm

How could the officer responded in a "more rational way"? it's the middle of the night, he's responding to a burglary where he has to assume the worst (armed intruder), he finds said intruder and orders him to the ground. That's as rational as it gets. Where it gets irrational is when the intruder advances on the officer instead of complying. Oh yeah, the intruder is fucking hammered on booze and who knows what else. So he gets a pass for being "irrational" due to being drunk? Nope, and that's what makes this entire thing a tragedy. I'l say it again: If Paul Heenan had laid down as ordered, the cop would have quickly sorted out this mess via help from the homeowner. Everything that happened after Heenan's failure to comply has to be laid on Heenan, not the cop.
david cohen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:48 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:06 pm

They're 2 doors down from the address where the alleged robbery was. This would immediately make anyone wonder why, and what was really happening. O'Malley and Paulie were struggling, there was no weapon. Paulie weakly (flailing and swatting: have you ever watched a really wasted skinny person try to fight? I have. It's like watching a fish out of water) attempted to struggle with Heimness, but they separated. Paulie was not lunging at Heimness, but Heimness fired anyway. Not to mention that the homeowner screamed several times "HE'S MY NEIGHBOR! HE'S MY NEIGHBOR" before Paulie was in contact with Mr. Heimness. That's as strong of a signal to officer Heimness that this is not what it seems as it could be. O'Malley saw what the bartender at State Street Brats saw.

I agree that Paulie's drunk approach towards the officer is irrational, but they had separated, another officer had just pulled up, Paulie was not lunging towards Mr. Heimness, and likely never actually grabbed at his gun before that. Should the reaction be lethal in this situation? O'Malley, who was there, not only thinks no, but he feels very strongly that way.

Is it rational to blow away an unarmed, skinny drunk you had no problem separating yourself from when another officer has arrived? It could be if Heimness actually feared that the skinny drunk, who wasn't approaching him, might again, and could over power him, though he only flailed at Heimness just seconds ago.

So now we have both sides of the story, and it doesn't fit the original narrative. In fact, it's quite a bit different. That says a lot all on it's own.
Last edited by jonnygothispen on Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3078
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Officer won't face criminal liability in shooting death

Postby david cohen » Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:21 pm

I apologize John- clearly you were there!
david cohen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar