Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Public Sector Gulags

NISD officer shoots and kills teen after chase

<< < (9/12) > >>

DD Form 214:
The officer was a good man and many children had good things to say about him.  lol

Ursus:
Comments left for the above article, "Police officer's past questioned in teen death" (by Steve Linscomb, 5/23/2011, News 4 WOAI), #s 21-40:


CowboyUp - 5/24/2011 10:08 AM
This is just nuts. If you have your kids in school at NISD, and they get in a fight with another student and run, you better hope Officer Alvardo is not on patrol. He may decide to KILL themeducatedloco - 5/24/2011 10:12 AM
So let's see, you have one SAPD officer who let's a crack head get away, then a second SAPD officer cuts her hand while chasing a would be car thief that got away, then of course you have a handful of SAPD officers under investgation for sexual misconduct, and then the tragic suicides. Sounds to me like this NISD cop is doing a pretty good job compared to some of the SAPD officers. Just my opinion.TruthSpeaks - 5/24/2011 10:13 AM
I think it's horrible to suggest that this kid "deserved" his ultimate fate, He was a kid and sometimes kids fight?? Thats nothing new, I think that the bottom line is Yes, He should not have ran, but the officer Should not have shot him, And the fact that he was killed my a school officer is absolutely appauling, and disgusting to me, Tax payer pay for them to protect our students, not to gun them down!!!sharpie - 5/24/2011 10:15 AM
losvatoslocos - The officer did not do what he was trained to do. He disobeyed a direct order from his supervisor to not search for the child.Darkie Lawless - 5/24/2011 10:40 AM
Hear the case is going to a grand jury either for "indictment" or "no bill" ,also the family is consulting with their attorney,and they have a good case against the NISD for millions on a wrongful death suit. The family's attorney has expert witnesses that specialize in law enforcement shootings,they sat the officer screwed up,armed vs unarmed. It's not all about who's the punk kid,who disobeys supervisors orders & has a write up history. It's all about armed vs unarmed. The SAPD shooting team said he screwed up.two beers - 5/24/2011 11:04 AM
To everyone...those who are happy this kid was killed and those who are unhappy this kid was killed. You have got to believe that this officer did not WANT to kill an unarmed kid. He did not KNOW the kid was unarmed. I don't think he even KNEW the burglar he was notified of was actually the kid he saw fighting, so he probably did not know the victim was a KID. If I remember the original story, he was searching a backyard for a burglary suspect and about to open the shed doors when they flew open in his face. His gun was already drawn and he fired at the perceived threat. BOTH SIDES of this argument are letting their emotions color what happened. The kid was not executed for getting into a fight. The kid was not shot for running away. Be objective in your arguments. Don't make stuff up like Darkie Lawless is doing. Don't manufacture emotions or judgements like EVERYONE seems to be doing. I know people are passionate about the issue, but try to stick to the facts instead of making stuff up.dcast - 5/24/2011 11:17 AM
Two beers, you have had two beers too many! Are u kidding saying he did not know who he was looking for in the backyard? If the homeowner told him that she thought there was a burglar hiding in her shed and he would have actually thought this was a REAL burglar instaead of this 14 year old kid that made the run on him then this coward would not have investigated, this COWARD would have called the REAL law enforcement and waited for them. He was a SCHOOL guard not a neighborhood watch patrol!!MLZarazua - 5/24/2011 11:34 AM
As I've stated previously on another website, actions have consequences for both of them. However, painting this so-called "child" into a choir boy is ridiculous! He had been suspended NUMEROUS times and once from an elementary school. I cannot explain to you how difficult that is. These parents SHOULD have taught him to accept responsiblity for his actions and respect authority. THEN he might not have found himself in this situation. Now they are acting "over-involved" looking to make a penny off their son. This "kids-will-be-kids" mentality explains why we now have a generation of kids who feel entitled and blame everyone else for thier mess!eltoro67 - 5/24/2011 12:47 PM
This is a very old argument. If memory serves the kid was hiding in a shed. The officer approached and the kid rushed out of the shed. I believe when the kid rushed out the shed door knocked the cop down and the cop fired. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this). The kid was unarmed when he was killed. The officer claimed he feared for his life. From what I remember, the cop knew the kid was hiding in the shed because the homeowner told him. The kid was already trapped and the cop could have waited for backup if he "feared for his life". If a cop feels a 14 year old is dangerous but trapped in a shed he should call for back up especially if he supposedly "FEARS FOR HIS LIFE"! Because the cop knew he was dealing with a 14 year old he also KNEW there were other options to using a gun (baton, tazer, etc.). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see there is something seriously wrong with all this. CavScout, with all the options the cop had to avoid killing this kid there is absolutely no way in hell that you can expect anyone to take the cop's word on this. The cop either lied when he claimed he feared for his life, lacks common sense, or maybe the police force didn't train him properly, or maybe it was personal! Also, you claim his reprimands come from administrative work well, I don't know what kind of mistakes on paperwork could cause reprimands serious enough to get you suspended without pay and 16 times in three years! How can you tell me this is someone we can trust with a gun when we can't even trust him to perform simple administrative duties?Superspurs - 5/24/2011 1:39 PM
None of us were present when this happened. None of us are police officers, so we really cant say with any certainty what was right or wrong.two beers - 5/24/2011 1:57 PM
dcast, even with "two beers too many", I still make much more sense than you do. The fact that you draw a distinction between what you call a "school guard" and "real law enforcement" casts doubt on anything else you might say, true or not. All Texas POLICE OFFICERS must receive the same minimum basic academy training and must pass the same TCLEOSE exam. They must also ALL receive the same continuing education. The ONLY difference is the PHYSICAL jurisdiction. In this instance, the jurisdictions overlap. The school officer can have jurisdiction in the city, just like a Bexar County deputy has jurisdiction in the city. If it were a simple report call, the primary jurisdiction handles it. If there is an exigent circumstance, as in this case, any agency with jurisdiction may handle it. If it is a felony or a breach of the peace, ANY Texas Peace Officer may handle it. Read the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure and learn something. Or ask the police officer of your choice. Again, sticking to FACTS ONLY, and not opinions...an ISD POLICE OFFICER is no different from a city, county, or state POLICE OFFICER. If it says Police on their uniform, they're not a security guard, they're a cop. Just because you are ANGRY with what happened, it does not change that FACT. You can question what he did all you want (and I back your right to do so!), but you can't change what he IS.ElJefe - 5/24/2011 2:06 PM
We know one thing for certain, the killer here had 16 chances to right his wrongs and do better, then killed someone, and still has suffered no fitting consequences. The victim died at 14, and will never have another "chance". Wrong as he may have been, he was 14.dcast - 5/24/2011 2:32 PM
Eljefe you just gained my respect, the simple truth here is that a 14 year old was murdered, plain and simple. Nobody has the right to be executioner, I seriously doubt the ones who are trying to justify this mans actions truly believe he was innocent in this case OR his prior 16 reprimands!!CowboyUp - 5/24/2011 2:51 PM
Choir boy or juvenile delinquent, the kid did not need to be shot for running from a fight. The cop should have called for backup and waited, not rush into the backyard with his gun drawn to get a 14 year old. He had been written up 16 times for not following instructions, and again here his supervisor TOLD him not to pursue the kid, but he decided to anyways...losvatoslocos - 5/24/2011 3:36 PM
U weren't there Sharpie Queen King what ever you are ! SO stop trying to stir the kettle ! When have you ever known for the news to ever get any information right, Just like YOU the news like to stir the kettle ! 'YAWWWWWWN ! Again Good job officer !two beers - 5/24/2011 4:02 PM
Geez, there are plenty of good points to be made on both sides of this argument without having to resort to incendiary words like "executioner" and "murder". Whatever happened, I'm sure he was not shot BECAUSE he was "running from a fight". That is such a lame argument. Why not say, he shouldn't be shot for wearing a red shirt. Or for wearing shoes. Or for being a Virgo. Duh! You're making statements that anyone would agree with and pretending that it relates AT ALL to what happened here. C'mon people, make a good argument or don't post. Don't resort to name calling and falsehoods to try to make your point. If you can't make a point objectively, you probably don't have one. You are simply angry at WHAT happened and don't care to think about WHY it happened. Same to those who are simply stating, "one less hood rat" or "future crimes were prevented". You too are just letting your anger make your point. I'm sure nobody wanted this to happen, really. I'm sure everyone would love a "do-over". It's a tragedy for everyone involved. Throwing out lies and insults at EITHER the cop or the kid shows a serious lack of though or intelligence and an overabundance of emotion.two beers - 5/24/2011 4:03 PM
though=thought...sorryFoxfire7 - 5/24/2011 4:12 PM
I am sick of the diatribe of " none of us was there " or none of us are police officers. I think most officers go into that line of work because they have that bully instinct. They are zeroes wanting to seen as heroes. They are mentally ill. And just this morning they murder a 46 year old woman with scissors. They need to get over their God complex.orlando - 5/24/2011 4:30 PM
Foxfire, El Jefe, and Cowboy up..RIGHT ON! Losvatoslocos, you're ignorrant and lack common sense and of course lack compassion.Deepcscott - 5/24/2011 5:59 PM
Same old song and dance from Foxfire. Yawn. He must have been "bullied" by an officer at one point in his life and still hasn't gotten over being the "victim".Officers are people that do a job that most do not want or care to do. This officer's case will go to the Grand Jury and we will see what happens next. Until then nobody knows what will happen.

© 2010 Newport Television LLC

Ursus:
Comments left for the above article, "Police officer's past questioned in teen death" (by Steve Linscomb, 5/23/2011, News 4 WOAI), #s 41-56:


dcast - 5/24/2011 6:28 PM
Two beers you are right about one thing, the officer involved would love a "do-over" but unfortunately he cant get one and deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law, just because you have a badge does not make you exempt from them, sorry.ncflores210 - 5/25/2011 6:40 AM
MURDER, plain and simple. Thats just plain old murder.two beers - 5/25/2011 6:57 AM
dcast, I agree. A badge should not make anyone exempt from the law. ncflores210, look up the definition of "murder". You'll see how stupid your simple minded inflammatory post makes you look. This is my last post on the matter. Right or wrong, the cop is NOT an executioner or murderer. Good or bad, the kid did NOT "deserve" to die. It's not always black and white. There is a lot of gray area between the extremes that are being posted here.garden - 5/25/2011 8:50 AM
firsat off charge him wiht manslaughter. I would like woai to get all the sa school dist, I would like all officers disciplainys, reports published on woai web site. this is public information. This man would probably weighs over two hundred pounds, killed a boy whould 80 pounds. He should have followed orders and stayed with the other boy. If he was military he would be court marshelled. Please dont let him keep his job. I hope hes not getting paid while this is being investing.Johnny Cash - 5/25/2011 8:57 AM
Bottom line, you dont charge the police like you're going to attack them. I seen the woman on the news saying her son was devastated by the incident (money money money)next will come the frivolous law suit. I bet this kid was given everything his whole life except discipline. Unfortunatly it cost him his life. Quit getting away from the real thing that happened,and make people accountable for their actions.arewestupid - 5/25/2011 12:44 PM
How was he able to "CHARGE" the cop, he was to busy hiding from him,it makes more sense that he tried to run away when the cop found himthen he was shot in the back ,now that makes sense.yes,big MAN/cop w/gun against little teenage boy. yeah sure senseless murder.plain&simpleMLZarazua - 5/25/2011 12:49 PM
El Jefe...the 14 year old kid had PLENTY of chances....geez, how many schools do you have to be suspended from before you wake up and realize that you are WRONG! Every action has a consequence and he chose to live this type of life over and over again. All of you talking about "poor kid" were probably the same type of problem child yourself or you have kids who misbehave but you blame others for it. Ridiculous!arewestupid - 5/25/2011 12:58 PM
OK mlzarazue,The consequences of getting shot in the back "dead" trying to run away, is NOT right in my book!! it was cowardly and he should be punished and charged for what it was!! murder...MLZarazua - 5/25/2011 2:55 PM
He wasn't shot in the back arewestupid...great screen name though! Yes we are raising a nation of entitled, spoiled children. Nobody taught him right from wrong, yet he was old enough to know the difference. He had a history of drugs, assault, theft and only 14? Please, he was a punk and I'm not saying he deserved to die, but CONSEQUENCES are what they are. Period!ferguson - 5/25/2011 5:28 PM
@MLZarazua are you for real?? he had enough chances now it's time to shoot the kid?? there is something seriously wrong with you. how many times did the officer screw up at his job? does he deserve to be shot for thoses mistakes? get your head on straight.Richard121 - 5/26/2011 11:47 AM
Way too many cops today are cowards. Remember, cowardice has two sides: fear of confronting a worthy opponent and unseemly desire to hurt an inferior opponent. Too many men become cops today hoping the badge and gun will make them brave; it never works. The gun only makes them dangerous and the badge means they usually get away with it. The old saying applies "Give a sissy a gun and he will shoot everything in sight." This cop is a coward. Worse, he is an angry coward who expressed his anger with a murder. He needs to be treated the same as anyone else who shot an unarmed kid. The family will file a lawsuit; the jury should award punitive damages in such an amount that the old coward's excuse "Department Policy" will have to change or suffer municipal bankruptcy.xrazorwirex - 5/26/2011 7:41 PM
No way; are there really people who seriously defend the murderer?? ARE YOU SERIOUS!?!??! That makes my gut hurt, real bad, that there's such sociopathic people out there who, without a second thought, defend this cop's behavior. Some people won't change their minds until the state comes and violates themselves or someone they love, but seriously people, a huge cop hunted down and executed an unarmed 8th grader for a single punch to a schoolmate who hardly cared. How many times did you mess up as a kid? Maybe someone should have just hunted you down and executed you? 3-strikes you're out? Jesus... Please see a psychiatrist.hitmanoo73 - 5/27/2011 11:35 AM
i dont live in san antone for a reason. your police force and district attorneys seem to have forgotten something called a constitution. the fat tub of guts that hides behind his badge and kills kids needs to come out here and we will show him how much respect we have for his badge and athority.ferguson - 5/28/2011 3:34 AM
i'm sure the cop didn't know the kids history of drugs and assault or whatever you're using to justify the shooting. he just saw a teenager running away he chased him down and shot him. that's it. the kids history has nothing to do with it. all that came out after he died.ferguson - 5/28/2011 3:36 AM
and if the cop did know the kids history he shouldve know how to deal with him. what kinda cold hearted person shoots a kid that he knows?mainewolf - 5/28/2011 7:57 AM
protect and serve, that is what they dawn the badge and title they are to protect our children from others and themselves if the need-be they are not judge and jury.i saw no need for force not like they did not know where the kid lived or goes to school.

© 2010 Newport Television LLC

Ursus:
Here's some more news coverage re. recent revelations 'bout Officer Daniel Alvarado's prior work history. This article appears to be the 'Full Monty' from which the Daily Mail extracted prescient portions (posted earlier by Oscar, 2nd article). Since there's quite a bit more to it, I'm gonna go ahead and post the whole thing...

-------------- • -------------- • --------------

San Antonio Express-News

Officer who shot student had history of not following orders
12 warnings. 4 suspensions. Why was the NISD cop who killed an unarmed 14-year-old on the job?

By Brian Chasnoff / bchasnoff@express-news.net
08:34 a.m., Friday, May 20, 2011
Updated 09:33 a.m., Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Shortly after a supervisor told Daniel Alvarado to stay with the victim of a minor assault and not search for the suspect, the school district officer ran into the backyard of a Northwest Side home with his gun drawn.

Moments later, Alvarado fired his weapon, killing an unarmed 14-year-old boy.

The November incident was not the first time the officer had ignored an order, according to records recently obtained by the San Antonio Express-News.

Since 2006, Alvarado's supervisors at the Northside Independent School District Police Department had reprimanded or counseled him on at least 12 occasions — six for not following orders. In other cases, Alvarado failed to show up for assignments, and his bosses appeared to suspect him of lying.

Alvarado was suspended at least four times, and his supervisors warned of impending termination four times — once even recommending it.

But Alvarado, 46, never was fired. Six months after the death of student Derek Lopez, as an investigation into the shooting continues, the 17-year veteran of the Police Department remains with the school district.

For Denys Lopez Moreno, the teen's mother, such revelations about Alvarado's employment have compounded her grief.

"They should've taken action a long time ago," Moreno said through tears. "He never followed orders. What makes you think he can deal with children?"

At school, Lopez was troubled. Expelled from elementary school, he spent years rotating through alternative schools and the county's juvenile justice academy. He'd been disciplined for possessing drugs, assault and theft, school officials said.

But at home, his family says he was a loving child who would cook for his younger brother and sister and help them with their homework.

Moreno hired an attorney in December to investigate the shooting.

The attorney, Wally Brylak, filed actions in court to force the school district to release records, including Alvarado's disciplinary history and a dispatch recording. He also subpoenaed witnesses for depositions, some of which contradict Alvarado's version of events.

Reached by phone, Alvarado declined to discuss the shooting. NISD spokesman Pascual Gonzalez said the officer has been placed on administrative duty since the incident.

The San Antonio Police Department has ruled the case a justified shooting. The Bexar County district attorney's office still is investigating.

The question of whether the shooting was justified is unrelated to the officer's history of disobeying orders, Assistant District Attorney Cliff Herberg said. The former is a legal matter; the latter, administrative.

Gonzalez echoed the distinction in a prepared statement.

"We are aware of Officer Alvarado's work history," he said. "While there are some documented incidents, it's important to note that they were administrative in nature, and had nothing to do with student safety."

But David Klinger, a former police officer who's now a professor of criminology and an expert in the use of deadly force, was surprised by Alvarado's disciplinary history.

"It sounds like they knew this guy was a problem," Klinger said. "If someone's insubordinate in a bunch of circumstances, it's logical to believe they'll be insubordinate in an important circumstance."

He added, "Mercifully, from what I know, these are rare. Most of the time when an officer has a problem following an order or doing their job, they get counseled so they learn how to do their job.

"If they don't, at some point they're terminated."

'Stay with the victim'

Recorded in depositions, witnesses' recollections offer a closer look at the Nov. 12 incident.

About 4:30 p.m., at Vista West Drive and Hunt Lane, a 13-year-old student from the Bexar County Juvenile Justice Academy was talking on a cell phone at a bus stop when Lopez, one of his classmates, punched him in the face.

"He just hit me once," the boy said in his deposition. "It wasn't a fight. It was nothing."

Alvarado, in a patrol car, saw the punch and said, "Freeze!"

Lopez ran. Alvarado sped off in pursuit, at one point leaving his patrol car and chasing the boy into the backyard of a nearby subdivision, according to a police report.

But Lopez slipped away.

"I just had one run from me," Alvarado, out of breath, told a dispatcher. "I saw an assault in progress. He punched the guy several times."

Alvarado returned to the bus stop. A police supervisor gave direction over the dispatch system.

"Let's not do any big search over there," the supervisor said. "Let's stay with the victim and see if we can identify (the suspect) that way. We can put one in the area, but let's concentrate on getting the info from the victim."

"I've got the victim right here," Alvarado said.

He then ordered the boy into his patrol car and set off in search of the suspect, according to the police report.

Accused of insubordination

In March 2006, Alvarado received an indignant letter from a supervisor.

Over the previous two months, the sergeant repeatedly had told him to close all of his cases before the end of his shifts, as policy requires.

"Your complete disregard toward my directive was evident upon checking your reports that are still incomplete and in some cases not written at all," the sergeant wrote.

A few weeks later, Alvarado's supervisor reprimanded him for making "no effort to complete said cases."

Over the next three years, many letters followed.

In January 2007, open cases still plagued Alvarado's work. When another reprimand failed to correct the issue, the sergeant issued Alvarado a letter of reprimand for insubordination.

"Your complete disregard for my directive is a blatant act of insubordination," he wrote.

A few months later, Alvarado's incomplete cases were disrupting court appointments, and a lieutenant recommended a one-day suspension.

In January 2008, Alvarado was suspended for one day for failing to show up for assignments.

He'd been scheduled to teach a grant-funded gang prevention class at a middle school. When the school's principal called the school district about the missing officer, a lieutenant called Alvarado and asked him where he was.

At the middle school, Alvarado said.

He arrived there 30 minutes later.

"Any further incidents of failing to follow a directive, an assignment, or violating practices will result in immediate termination of your employment," the suspension letter stated.

Later that year, Alvarado was four hours late to an assignment. Asked why, Alvarado said he'd told a clerk he couldn't make it.

But the clerk said "she does not remember you telling her anything like that," a letter of reprimand states. "We recommend immediate termination of your employment."

A few days later, Alvarado's bosses learned of even more violations, including more than 120 emails about his duties in the grant program that Alvarado had ignored.

But Alvarado was not fired. He was removed from the grant program and suspended for three days.

More violations followed.

In two separate cases, Alvarado was suspended for collecting evidence that disappeared, including an MP3 player and fingerprint cards.

In a letter for the latter case, a supervisor sent Alvarado a warning that must have sounded familiar.

"Be advised that due to your past history of violations, reprimands and suspensions, any further incidents will result in a recommendation to terminate your employment with Northside ISD."

The shooting

The homeowner was scared.

Someone had jumped over her fence in the 200 block of Roswell Canyon and entered her small shed, where her husband stored Christmas decorations, paint cans and a sledgehammer.

The retired nurse was inside with her two daughters and 3-year-old granddaughter.

"He went into the shed and I feared that he was going to get something and come after us," she recalled in a deposition.

The person in the shed was Lopez. Despite his supervisor's directive, Alvarado was speeding down the suburban street in pursuit.

The homeowner rushed to a window in her kitchen and screamed to a neighbor, who immediately saw the patrol car and flagged it down.

The homeowner went outside to meet the officer. Alvarado drew his gun "when he came up the driveway," she recalled.

No one saw the shooting. But inside the house, the homeowner and her daughters heard a gunshot about 45 seconds after Alvarado entered the backyard.

In a report, Alvarado wrote that he was approaching the shed with his gun drawn when the door flew open, hitting him in the face. No witness recalled seeing any injuries to the officer's face after the shooting.

"The suspect bull rushed his way out of the shed and lunged right at me," Alvarado wrote. "The suspect was literally inches away from me, and I feared for my safety."

Tracing the bullet's path into the boy's chest as it ricocheted off the pancreas, colon, right liver and left kidney and exited the stomach, an autopsy report notes a lack of gunpowder on Lopez's bloodstained T-shirt.

"There is no evidence of close range firing of the wound," the report concludes.

The homeowner saw the officer carrying the boy out of the shed and putting him "on the grass, on the ground," she said. She grabbed a bath towel and ran outside.

Applying pressure to the wound with the officer, she asked, "Why did you shoot him?"

"He came at me," he told her.

A paramedic who lived next door ran into the backyard.

The boy looked bad: Sweaty and clammy, his skin was ashen and cool. He was taking short, gasping breaths. A pulse was barely there.

As for the officer, "He looked a little dazed or distant," the paramedic said. "He needed someone to tell him what to do."

The paramedic called for AirLife.

In the patrol car, the boy from the bus stop was talking to his mother on the cellphone when he heard the gunshot and dropped the phone. Rushing to the car, his mother saw her son with watery eyes, "just staring."

At one point, the mother told a witness, "He shot him? Why did he shoot him? He didn't have to shoot him."

Still alive, Lopez was carried to the front yard on a tarp, and officers and paramedics converged on the scene. The mother saw a female officer wiping blood from the boy's mouth, saying, "Mijo, it's OK."

Her son recalled Alvarado telling another officer that he had "panicked" when he fired.

Before Lopez died, one of the homeowner's daughters went outside. She had been frightened when she saw him go into the shed, but now she felt something else.

"I just remember his mouth moving a little bit," she said. "That's when I saw his braces. And that's when I realized that it was a little boy."


© 2011 Hearst Communications Inc.

Ursus:
Sidebar to the above article, "Officer who shot student had history of not following orders":

-------------- • -------------- • --------------

San Antonio Express-News

History of discipline

NISD officer Daniel Alvarado was disciplined numerous times between 2006 and 2009. A partial list of violations:

March 17, 2006
Arrived 90 minutes late for assignment

March 27, 2006
Reprimand, for not completing reports

Jan. 8, 2007
Reprimand, insubordination for incomplete case reports

Jan. 11, 2008
One-day suspension for multiple missed assignments

June 9, 2008
Three-day suspension for substandard performance

Aug. 21, 2008
Reprimand, for failing to report confiscation of MP3 player

Sept. 4, 2008
Warned of impending termination because of 10 reprimands, counseling and suspensions in two years

April 7, 2009
Three-day suspension for missing fingerprint evidence


© 2011 Hearst Communications Inc.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page