Goldstein and Ruderman report: "Investigators believe at least 7 of those 16 bullets struck the gunman, said Paul J. Browne, the Police Department's chief spokesman. But the officers also struck some, if not all, of the nine bystanders who were wounded."
Robert Asika, who was wounded in Friday's shooting, said he was standing behind the gunman when the police opened fire. (photo: Victor J. Blue/NYT)
Madman Shoots 1, NYPD Shoots 9
25 August 12
s the two officers confronted a gunman in front of the Empire State Building on a busy Friday morning, they had to make a snap decision: Do they open fire in the middle of Midtown?
From a distance of less than 10 feet, the officers, Craig Matthews and Robert Sinishtaj, answered in unison; one shot nine times and the other seven.
Investigators believe at least 7 of those 16 bullets struck the gunman, said Paul J. Browne, the Police Department's chief spokesman. But the officers also struck some, if not all, of the nine bystanders who were wounded.
This was the second time in two weeks that the police were involved in a fatal shooting in Midtown; on Aug. 11, two officers fired 12 shots at a knife-wielding man after he escaped arrest in Times Square.
The Patrol Guide prohibits officers from firing their weapons if, "in their professional judgment, doing so will unnecessarily endanger innocent persons."
Mr. Browne said that in Friday's shooting, the two officers had taken account of their surroundings before firing, as they are trained to do. Video surveillance footage, Mr. Browne said, shows that most of the wounded bystanders were closer to the Empire State Building, while the shooter was near the curb.
One of those wounded said he was standing behind the gunman when the police opened fire.
"One of the cops shot me in my arm," a 23-year-old man, Robert Asika, said outside Bellevue Hospital Center. He said that the gunman was moving toward him, and suggested that the officers "shot me probably trying to shoot him."
Mr. Asika said he could not "really get mad at the cops."
"I get they were doing their job, but they have to be a little more careful when they are aiming the gun at the suspect and not hit the innocent victims," he said. Video released by the Police Department shows no one close to the gunman.
The two officers were from the South Bronx, working a tour as part of the Police Department's counterterrorism deployment at high-profile locations. The duty normally entails helping tourists and the like, and as New Yorkers trickled into work shortly after 9 a.m., this day seemed no different. In the crowd that streamed past was a man dressed in a suit and tie and carrying a black bag, going by the officers calmly and unhurriedly, Mr. Browne said.
"He wouldn't have drawn anyone's particular attention," Mr. Browne said, if not for a construction worker who "pointed him out to these officers." The worker said that the man had just shot someone around the corner.
The officers approached the gunman, whom the police identified as Jeffrey T. Johnson, and the situation quickly escalated.
Surveillance video shows Mr. Johnson walking north on Fifth Avenue, between the street and some curbside planters. The two officers gave chase, just as a family of four walked past Mr. Johnson in the other direction. The video showed him reaching into a bag, pulling out a .45-caliber pistol and pointing it at the officers.
The shooting was over in a matter of seconds.
A number of the bystanders may have been wounded by bullet fragments and ricochets after bullets struck nearby flowerpots, Mr. Browne said, suggesting that the bystanders were not in the path of the bullets when the officers fired.
Many of the wounds to bystanders were "mostly in the lower extremity areas, such as legs and ankles, which would be consistent with some of the ricochet fragmented ballistics we found," Mr. Browne said.
He said there was no ballistic evidence that the gunman fired any rounds as the police confronted him, though the police were still investigating a report by one witness who said the gunman did fire at the police.
The officers have been removed from patrol duty - standard practice when one discharges a weapon, the police said.
Mr. Browne said officers were trained to take cover, if possible, when facing a gunman, but there was no opportunity to do so here.
"They were approaching this man with a gun, and he turns on them, and he is eight feet away, pointing a gun right at them," he said.
It is not unheard-of for bystanders to be hit in police shootouts. A year ago, a woman sitting on her stoop was killed in a shootout in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, in which the police fired 73 shots at a gunman who had just fatally shot another man. The police have since conceded that a police bullet might have killed the woman but have said the ballistics leave some uncertainty.
And a decision by the state's highest court in 2010 found that the police involved in a 2005 shooting in Harlem could not be found negligent for wounding two bystanders. The majority decision noted that the officers had not seen any of the bystanders in the area at the time of the shooting. However, a dissenting opinion in the case pointed out that some of the officers had given testimony suggesting that they had not looked.
Officer Matthews is well-known in the Police Department because he had filed a federal lawsuit alleging that in the 42nd Precinct, there was a strict quota system for arrests, summonses and street stops.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |













Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
We would be reading about scores more bystanders being shot if every bystander was armed and shooting. Officers spend hours on the gun range and must qualify with their service weapon. The average gun owner does not. Police are trained to keep shooting unitl the target drops and is out of commission. This is better than shooting and waiting to see if someone is still capable of shooting you. Unlike the movies, people don't always go down when hit. In fact, they usually don't if the central nervous system isn't compromised. I know this all sounds cold. I am not saying there aren't some bad cops. But I asure you there are no good, bad guys. Also, I am not anti-gun. I own several and spend a lot of time on the gun range. I also have a son-in-law who is a police officer and have spent time on ride alongs.
One guy pulls a gun. Twenty more people pull guns. Shit! He's got backup. Shoot them all. Result? Many more dead civilians.
Bystanders are a pain in the ass...now we have to get in closer to put on cell then utube...aren't we creative putting the killing of someone on the web. Wonder where those kids in Afghanistan does torture and video it...so do everyone here.
People should move back, drop down, get into doorways. But no let's get a picture to show people. Real nice touch. People at disasters, crime scenes are the problem but when I hear five hundred bullets were shot, it scares the crap out of me that they have that many guns on a scene of one person ...terrorist cell fine but not controlling the shots after man is down and bleeding out ....
Another case is the old guy in the Florida store who fired 9 shots at two fleeing felons, no more than eight feet away, and missed with all 9 shots. What if someone else had been in the store? He could have killed more innocent people than the bad guys.
Why so many shots?
A paper target is much different than someone pointing a gun at you. You don't know how you would react until you have been there. Police are trained to continue shooting unitl the target is down. I too practice double-tap, at the range. The target won't shoot me while I "stop" to access the impact of my shots.
That said, why was it necessary for two officers to fire 16 shots in this incident. I understand the need to deadly force here without question, given the situation. But wouldn't the standard military "two shots center mass" (aka "the double tap") have been quite sufficient?
I do not question the officers' accuracy--the gunman was moving and so were bystanders. I do question the wisdom of firing 16 rounds into a crowd at short range.
No gun necessary, much less shooting at a cop, to be blown away, almost literally.
Of course there was a need to shoot, but the way they are shooting. Suggesting that maybe 7 out of 16 hits at a range of 8 to 10 feet???
These guys need more training and range time.
Over the years, a number of my targets have not been paper. I've never emptied my weapon before the situation was resolved.
No one was returning fire at these officers.
Conclusion: Overkill. Concur with the "double tap" approach. Worked for me in the Marines. Save the taxpayers from having to buy so much ammo, too.
Their issue weapons were Colt or Smith and Wesson revolvers, caliber .38 Special, and the city provided each cop an all-you-can-sho ot issue of ammunition for annual practice.
Around the time revolvers were declared obsolete, the anti-gun fanaticism of NYC politicians also crippled NYPD marksmanship. The cops' free practice ammo was severely limited. The pinpoint-accura te revolvers were replaced by 9mm Glock semiautomatics -- extremely durable but marginal in accuracy potential. The Glocks were further compromised by anti-gun insistence on absurdly heavy trigger pulls (an alleged "safety" measure that makes accuracy impossible). Meanwhile the minimal stopping power of the 9x19mm cartridge was further reduced by limiting cops to ball ammunition: full-metal-jack eted, non-expanding bullets most likely to ricochet or over-penetrate and therefore kill or wound innocents, even at a great distance.
Combine all these limitations imposed on the NYPD by anti-gun politicians -- marginally accurate weapon, limited practice, ball ammo and the shoot-until-the y-drop policy so necessitated -- you have spray-and-pray shooting with the tragically ironic results demonstrated yesterday in Midtown.
Perhaps the Politicians are trying to get less funerals for officers and their families. Less Law Suits, less Disability.
However, shooting should be taken seriously esp if it is going to a gun you carry daily. Classes, one on one with Counselors, listening to attitudes, putting people into situations using visual rooms with targets not paper but robotic, even video. Too many of the incidents everywhere in this Country shows poor teaching, poor evaluation, and not enough preparedness.
You can never know what you will do in any given circumstance. But preparing, testing, going thru exhibitions could certainly save lives on all sides...bad, good and the bystanders. Imagine sitting in your home alone or with kids and being shot or watching your child be shot due to a bullet the Bad Guy didn't shoot because he was dead after two but all the cops had to empty rounds.
Time we re evaluate how we train our men and women. No one wants that phone call
The precinct where the system appears to have been in place was the 42nd, in the Bronx. He was on duty at the Empire State Building, so it appears he was transferred.
Was it for his own protection from retaliation, or was it retaliation against him?
I got a ticket in far western Kansas last week. It was B.S. I'm wondering if there was quota there, but it's very difficult to prove. I lived in Marin County, California, 40 years ago. We had a State Board of Equalization member who was stopped in a restaurant parking lot and given a ticket for being intoxicated "in or around" a vehicle. He wasn't driving. There was no evidence he intended to drive. He took the Sausalito police to court, established it had a very defined quota system, beat his case and got a law passed outlawing the practice.
Matthews sounds like a professional officer. He actually tracked the suspect before he drew his weapon. Still, he and/or his partner may have overreacted.
Cops get substantial training that should include exercises in when not to fire. Despite that, there are many jurisdictions that on the surface seem notoriously trigger happy. Anaheim, California, has been in the national news this month for such a high rate of fatal shootings by police. Wichita, Kansas has had similar recent problems of suspects being killed by cops even though they were not a danger.
But they should not have to get into that Position...A bit too ready to draw and shoot. I do not believe the training is substantial any longer.
One persons reactions, story will not be repeated. We all react differently in any given circumstance.
When we react with racism, it really proves there is not enough profiling done to candidates of training. I always laugh when I hear cops trashing other races. Funny how they do not do so when those men and women are saving their butts.
RSS feed for comments to this post