Cop responds to call ... aggressive teen with a baseball bat.
,,,, there is the larger battle taking place in the court of public opinion. I realize that Officer Rialmo and his attorney have to look out for his best interests, but is this really helping? In an already tense atmosphere around Chicago I can’t imagine there being much sympathy for a cop who tries to sue the family that just buried their son, disturbed and/or violent as he may have been. This just sounds like an ill considered plan.
The "The Kid With A Bat".
THERE ARE TWO POINTS OF VIEW TO BE CONSIDERED HERE"
FIRST: The Kid With The Bat --
Oh, I don't know what was going through his head.
As much as I would like to be able to analyze what he was thinking when he used a baseball bat to confront a cop, I cannot. My best guess is t hat there were drugs, or alcohol involved; but I can't even say that, because I don't know.
SECOND: The Cop with the GunCop sees a kid with a bat, the kid is aggressive and unwilling to disarms himself. Cop tries verbal domination techniques, the kid responds aggressively and the cop is left with "limited options".
Cop shoots The Kid With A Bat., bullet passes through and kills neighbor behind the teen.
THIRD: The Woman Behind The Kid With A Bat
Cop sues family of The Kid With A Bat. Cop's options are limited, and at this point (since a person who
Who's to know that the woman was behind the kid swinging the bat? Is this a call for Baseball Bat Control? In the middle of a firefight, the Tunnel Vision thing happens, and all you can see is the target.
An "uninvolved" person has died, she hs the cop's bullet in her, it's obvious who was the instrument of her death.
Now, we're talking about who was RESPONSIBLE for her death!The cop has responded by suing the family of The Kid With A Bat., who is identified as the person who caused the whole thing.
I don't know, maybe so. But one thing is sure;
The cop didn't know that the woman was behind the kid, had no idea that there was an Innocent involved, and is completely innocent of any death resulting from his response.
So the cop sues the estate of the kid with the bat. What else was he to do? Admit fault when no fault was possible to define?
Okay so I'm prejudiced in favor of the policeman. I don't blame him (the cop) for trying to shift the blame, because it wasn't HIS idea to get into a gunfight!
His best game plan was to go home at the end of his shift. NOBODY wants to get into a gunfight .
Well, except for The Kid With A Bat.
At this point, we have no idea whether the Woman was a partner with The Kid With The Bat, or an Innocent Bystander, or something in between. My guess is that she was an innocent, one way or the other. But we don't know that, and I'm waiting to read about the results of the investigation which mus surely ensue./
Tragedy or Collateral Damage?
It doesn't really matter, though. Whatever The Kid With The Bat had going on for him, it would be impossible under all but the most arcane circumstances to blame The Woman for the tragic outcome of this confrontation.
Well .. maybe. Usually.
We'll find out more, in the weeks to come.