Armed Suspect Fires at Police
Violent Armed Robbery Shown On Surveillance Tape

Officer Fires Non-Tactical Negligent Discharge

Los Angeles:  Early Monday morning, a Los Angeles Police Officer negligently fired one round from his police weapon.

On August 28, 2006, shortly after midnight, Police Officer Chris Walker heard his wife screaming in their living room.  He retrieved his service weapon and rushed to his wife's side.  As he was walking, his gun went off, the bullet travelled north and exited through a window.

Officer Walker's wife had screamed when she saw an unknown man attempting to enter the gate leading to the couple's residence.  Just two weeks before, the Walkers had been at home when their house was burglarized.

Officer Walker is 34 years old and has been with the LAPD for eight years.  He is assigned to Pacific Area Station.  No one was injured in this incident.

The Police Commission will ultimately review the case.

Questions may be directed to Media Relations Section at 213-485-3586.

Comments

Good job LAPD in protecting your fellow officers. It was an unfortunate, but negligent incident that occured for Officer Walker. Now that this story has been PUBLISHED by his own agency, Walker will now be plauged for life. For instance, if Walker is involed in a (god forbid) OIS (officer involved shooting), not only will he be under the standard scrutiny by the media, and citizens of LA, but the possible prosecuting attorney (if filed), will have much more to slander his character upon!... GOOD TACTICS! Just curious, who is going to protect officer Walker from his own dept.?

This accidental discharge is of itself a major embarrasment. Why does the LAPD need to list the officer who was responsible? He will have enough embarrasment from his peers and later take a major hit of at least 5 days suspended without pay.

I can see you listing the event but without the officers name. Is there not some privacy issue by doing this?

Please explain the difference between a tactical ND and a non-tactical ND.

The way I read it, it appeared to be a warning shot. The Suspect was scared away and you can be sure he won't be back.

Good job Officer Walker, too bad the PO-Leece Commish. will hand you a few days off due to you being a victim (twice).

New LAPD Motto:

We Don't Fight Crime, We Fight Numbers!

Isn't negligence only an allegation, until there is a ruling?

I appreciate the candor of the author noting the weapon was discharged "negligently" and not "accidently."

Yes what the heck is the point of making this public? Its not even a story worthy of the back page of a newspaper

In 2005, the Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners enacted policy directing the Department to release the names of officers involved in a Categorical Use of Force incident. These incidents include; Use of deadly force, all use of force resulting in an injury requiring hospitalization, deaths while the arrestee or detainee is in the custodial care of the LAPD, "accidental" and animal shootings and other investigations as directed by the Chief of Detectives.

Lt. De La Torre
Public Communications Section

It is no wonder that so many LAPD officers are lateralling to other agencies these days. Basically all of the policy is against them and when they do have an incident, the department is the first to disassociate themselves from the officer. What a garbage department. The officer did a fine job and it is too bad the department does not recognize that. Accidents happen.

Mr. James,
I'm sorry you feel the way you do. Every organization, private or public have their policies and procedures. I personally do not know Officer Walker, but I wish him the best and offer him this saying, "Adversity does not build character it reveals it."

There are close to 9000 men and women on this Department and am proud to be one of them.

If I'm not mistaken, the way it reads I think that these people are less interested about how adversity builds one's character, but what the point was of posting this blog anyway, much less the names. The way it looks, Officer Walker was in process of protecting his family from a residential robbery or burglary suspect. An incident which has already happened once before. In light of recent residential robberies where the families were tied up, tortured and terrorized, shouldn't this officer have been given a fair chance to defend himself administratively before leaving only part of his situation open to interpretation? In the Chief's big rush to be "transparent" it really appears that he is trampling on the rights of officers. Even if it is leagal, just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should. What happens if they catch the perp? You don't think that he isn't going to use all of this against the officer in his OWN defense? Where is the justice? And if not justice, at least common decency to this officers family, especially since this investigation will all be internal unless they catch this guy. I think that this is what they were trying to say. Unless I'm completely off track, then I would really like to know from the people commenting if I am.

I couldn't agree more Lawgirl, In the recent past I have really started to see the "transparency" of the LAPD. But it is the true "mission" of the Chief which is transparent. Numbers is all that matters. We have a group of "killers" terrorizing the valley, but the Chief and Chief Moore feel it is more important to focus on their "Goals" and reducing Crime Stats, than catching Robbers, who have murdered innocent victims. Their reign of terror has lasted over 3 years, yet it is not a "High" priorty.

I apologize for posting this under this heading but I could not find a posting about the Valley bandits.

To Officer Walker, Protect your family and yourself, Good job. accidents do happen. The Brass just gets to cover theirs. Like when a captain left his Police car running while he went into a store to get coffee. The police car was stolen along with his gun. Wait was that an accident or negligence, Shortly later the commander was promoted to Commander.

Lt. De La Torre, I hope this gets posted, since this is supposed to be unedited. I know some people may get upset, just as officer Walker may have. Lets have equality. The Double standard was supposed to be eliminated. We shall see.

I hope you don't mistake me for being digruntled, I am not. I love working for LAPD and protecting the great citizens.

If officers are to be scrutinized, so should the Chiefs.

I will never forget my first locker I was assigned, you couldn't miss it.....there was a HUGE .45 caliber bullet hole through it!!! Funniest thing though was that the hole was there, because of an "accidental" discharge. It didn't make the news, nor was the Sargeants name ever published...ANYWHERE!! Word has it that the Sargeant recieved a "notice to correct". If that was a boot, or a tenured patrol officer (P-2), he would have taken days, OR had been terminated. None the less, the incident would have been published throughout the division...ONLY! I offer you this Ofcr. Walker... things will get better...all you have to do is promote!... Then there's NO PUBLICITY, and you can go IOD for a paper cut!!...;-) Hang in there Walker..

In the end, a policeman and his family are alive. It's possible that an accidental discharge, in this case, may be a 'bit' more valuable than a discharge made on purpose by a crook seeking to end a person's life. Just a thought.

Gee, thx Lt DEL La Torre,
I wonder if you have worked the field recently. Where a cop will get a complaint for just about anything. We are guilty in the eyes of most "brass" befor we are innocent. Just because the department has policies does not make them right or fair.
It always seems that when a cop with some education gets promoted to the rank of LT. or above, they forget what it like to be a line cop. They are out of touch and in my opinion are not real leaders. Don't get me wrong, I'll respect the rank but I don't have to respect a man who treats others officers unfairly.
They need to be leaders and take care of their officers, lead from the front. Do what is fair and right!
You can throw the saying right back at you, "adversity does not build character it reveales it" WHAT BOOK DID THAT COME FROM?comment. It sure is revealing the departments character. It doesn't back officers, unfair policies, super ego leaders who don't really care about "their" officers only about their own hides, a complaint system which again is unfair and any aligation goes, mistakes made by officers(not misconduct)are investigated and the officers punished. I can go on and on. Officers are leaving the department for others with better leadership and no double standards. I heard the Chief say, "if you don't like it,go some place else". Well that is not the answer and that is whats happening. Alot of good cops are leaving.
So to all of you hard chargers out there, stay strong and to all of the "leaders" out there, get out from behind a desk, get in the field, and take care of your troops(Officers)!!!!

Mr Taylor,

I do believe that many of the standards for reporting and following up on alleged misconduct is a requirement of the consent decree that came as a result of a large number of corrupt LAPD officers abusing the authority that comes with their badge. Furthermore, the public has a right to know when situations such as this occur. Had that bullet hit some innocent bystander, it would be taxpayer dollars that would have been spent investigating the incident, and odds are it would have been taxpayer dollars that would have compensated the victim for their pain and suffering.

You are a police officer 24 hours a day, 7 days per week. By definition, negligence is not accidental. Had the officer in question been following the safety precautions he was taught in the Academy, and reinforced by POST standards, he never would have negligently discharged his weapon, and there never would have been an article for the LT to report.

Incidents such as these being kept internal and/or swept under the rug played no small part in the scandals that have plagued the LAPD for the last 13 years, and I applaud the Department's action in notifying the taxpayers of this incident.

Also, I am troubled by your comments regarding superior officers. Superior officers are not paid to "take care of the troops."

They are paid to take care of the taxpayers of Los Angeles. Please do not forget that.

Mr. Taylor, I have 25 plus years on the job, with tours as a police officer in Rampart, Hollywood, OCB Crash and Newton. As recently as this year I was at Northeast and before that Southeast. What I mentioned to you about character did not come from a book but from 47 years of life. My hope is that this officer's supervisors are treating him as he should be, "As a number one customer."

JQ public,
it is not fair to release the officers name to the public for this! There is no need. I guess you know all the fact 100% about the shooting. How do you know that he didn't fire a warning shot? Are you sure of your facts? See thats the problem with this department. They are so quick to say guilty. There was no need to give the officers name.
Now as for supervision taking care of its officers, i guess you have never been a leader of men. What im saying is you take care of their welfare. You treat them fair and just. See i know this because I have been and still am a leader of men in the military and on this job. Do the right thing good or bad. Supervision has 2 jobs, take care of their officers and serve the community. If you don't understand the concept then you never will and i hope you dont lead men and women.
LT. if you have 25 years on the job, tell me honestly, when was the last time you put on a vest and worked in the field. When have you been complained on by citizens for doing the right thing and have those complaints put in your package? Have you had a complaint for making an mistake and taken days for it? If the leadership in this department can't say that some of our policies and practices are unfair to officers, then I guess we have nothing to say but yes sir and keep on as the way we have. And like i said good officers will leave this department. With the list i gave, if you tell me that they are all fair, then thats your opinion and we differ sir. I still believe in fairness and doing the right thing for your men and women and as a cop i will continue to do the right thing in the street.

Taylor, yes 25 years class 3-81. I have personnel complaints, some public initiated others Department initiated. You seem to have a strong commitment for your partners, Department and the public. Seek to be part of the solution, promote, we need leaders and thinkers.

STRENGTH THROUGH UNITY AND UNITY THROUGH FAITH.........

This is why the Officers and Citizens are so upset with the supervision and leadership of the LAPD. As I wrote before about the robbers terrorizing the Valley: Monday morning about 2:00 A.M., a citizen walks into North Hollywood Station, she tells the desk officer she saw three men in a car putting on ski masks and gloves, to the rear of a business( I won't go into details, for investigative reasons) The desk officer notifies N. Hollywood Watch commander, who seems mildly interested.

A broadcast goes out and two hardworking patrol officers respond quickly. a foot pursuit ensues and the officers broadcast they are chasing 3 posssible robbery suspects, who are wearing ski masks and gloves, a perimeter is set-up. It happened Metropolitan Division was working N. Hollywood that night and was near end of watch, Metro responded and assited with N. Hollywwod.

Two of three suspects were caught very quickly. K-9 arrived and units were ready to search for the third suspect. A patrol supervisor then inquired if there was an actual robbery. There was not, so in his infinite wisdom told officers there was no crime and ordered the perimeter shutdown.

How about conspiracy, or maybe the 50 or so robberies that have occurred. This is an example of the poor leadership LAPD has. If this doesn't upset you then I guess you are fit for LAPD management. Every Officer out there was highly upset, but their hands are tied.

If an officer made this decision, I know a "Neglect of Duty" would soon follow, but a supervisor made it so it will be fine.

It is sad to see this happen. I just wish there was someone in LAPD leadership could see what is really happening and take action. Nunbers are not the sollution to everything!

To John Q Public,

I have served in the military as a supervisor leading troops. I have supervised over police officers struggling to do the job the best way that they know how for 12 years. I have also supervised civilians in the corporate world, so I have a well rounded working knowledge of the opinion being shared on this subject. Ultimately everyone share the same needs, wants and desires. All workers, of any skill and level, just want to be treated fairly.

I can honestly say, in all of the places I've worked and the crime reports that I've signed, I have never seen a negligent discharge of a firearm in a person's private residence, make ANYBODY's blog, the 6 o'clock news or raise enough interest to post their names across a media for the world to see.

Doesn't a police officer have rights of the common citizen, or the common criminal in some cases?

That's all that he was saying. If it is such an issue, feel free to look up the crime report in the hall of records if you have such a burning desire to know. That should be public enough for anybody, especially since only a smattering of all the information is posted! It would be the same as making any pertinent decision based on a 2 minute news bite from "name any news station." Leaving the officers name and family information out would have been the decent thing to do.

Oh, and by the way, police actions are not held accountable by, or justified through taxpayers. That is why we have a Police Commision. What, you don't think police officers pay taxes, I assure you that is not the case. Uncle Sam has us for about a third of our wages, which is more than most of the general population! So that line of reasoning is absurd.

True leaders take care of their troops, as you are so adamant about, by helping keep them legally, fiscally and administratively safe. That way, they can concentrate on taking care of YOU!!!!

Mr. John Q. Public...how interesting it is that in a post above related to Officer Walker, you state that an officer is "on duty" 24-7, yet under another thread, you slam West Traffic Officer Toth for stopping to assist another agency outside the city limits, when he sustained his injuries. Under your theory of "on duty 24/7", it would seem that Officer Toth was doing the right thing, yet in this instance you are upset that the "taxpayers" of L.A. will have to pay for his rehab, disability, etc. Well, Mr. John Q. Public, which way do you want the wind to blow? I question your "armchair quarterback" analysis of the conduct and job performance of these officers, and your tendency to fix the facts to fit your opinions.

Your BLOG entry attacking the competence of my watch commander and supervision in North Hollywood was forwarded to me the other day. Upon reading it, I felt compelled to provide some facts to clear the air.

Here are those facts.

There was quite a bite of concern and interest in the citizen’s report in that the watch commander and one of our most respected and senior supervisors both immediately went to the scene. The two officers that responded to the radio call and went in foot pursuit of the three suspects established an immediate perimeter, aiding in the capture of two of the suspects by responding officers.

When the watch commander and other supervisor asked the pursuing officers what direction the third suspect had ran, in a case of refreshing candor, one officer pointed to the west and one officer pointed to the east. They simply were not certain. When contact was made with the owner of the business, he indicated that he was not going to cooperate with the Department in prosecuting the two suspects we had in custody.

The watch commander made the decision to break down the perimeter after 10-15 minutes. That decision was predicated on four considerations:

1. We had two of the three suspects in custody;
2. We did not know the last suspect's direction of travel;
3. The business owner was un-cooperative; and
4. The perimeter was tight to the west only.

However, the two suspects were arrested and later booked for conspiracy to commit robbery. The crime was important enough to the watch commander that he asked the Robbery Coordinator respond from home to assist the Night Watch detective, who incidentally was also at the scene.

The Robbery Coordinator interviewed the two suspects, who admitted that they went to the business. They also provided information that led to the identification of the third suspect and they told the detectives where the outstanding suspect had parked his vehicle.

The third suspect's vehicle was located and impounded.

The third suspect was arrested at Van Nuys station when he went to the front desk to retrieve his vehicle from impound. He was interviewed by detectives and admitted to the robbery conspiracy. He admitted to masking up, peering into the business, but opting not to commit the robbery when he observed too many people inside the location.

The DA filed one count of Conspiracy to Commit Robbery against each of the three suspects based on the thoroughness of the investigation which resulted in gathering of the various items of evidence and incriminating statements.

While we are unable to connect these suspects to any other robberies, a crime bulletin has been distributed to surrounding Areas and the Departments to see if we can connect to other robberies. Robbery Homicide Division was also contacted that night and have monitored this investigation to determine if these suspects may be involved in other commercial robberies.

I hope the above information assists you in correcting your misconception of the competence and character of our watch commander and supervisors. While I can understand the differences of opinion that occur in field operations as to varying strategies to pursue in these types of situations, I’d ask you to exercise a bit more restraint in the future before spewing such mean spirited remarks as to the competence of others wearing the uniform. Sure, they could have stayed on the perimeter for hours but chose to cut bait and focus on the two that were in custody resulting in not only the identification and arrest of the third, but the gathering of sufficient evidence to achieve felony filings on all three. As a fellow member of this Department, I would think you’d understand there’s more than one way to get a job done.

By the way, in preparing this response I visited the Department’s BLOG and noticed you recently were also critical of a decision you believed I made as to asking Metropolitan Division’s C Platoon to stay in North Hollywood Area and work on our ongoing street robbery and take-over bandit problems versus going to Southeast where “…children were dying.” I find it disappointing that again your judgment is so strong and contempt so extreme while you and I, to my knowledge have never spoken. I’d welcome your insight and would enjoy the opportunity in ensuring you had all the information should you ever chose to step from behind the anonymity of a computer keyboard. Much as you have assailed those outside this Department and profession with your other posts for their lack of perspective in understanding the demands of the work we do, it seems you too have engaged in the art of shooting from the hip with impulse remarks that are unfair, discouraging, and reflecting contempt for those who would disagree with your viewpoint.

Police work is a dangerous, yet rewarding profession. There are harder jobs, but not jobs where you make harder decisions. I’m proud of the ones made by Lieutenant Romero and the others in North Hollywood last week. I’m also proud of all the men of women working out in Operations-Valley Bureau, trying to make a difference. I believe they do.

As for my decisions, they’re not always right – but I make them with my name attached and in full view of those that have been placed in my charge. You?

Michel R. Moore

That is coiming from a deputy chief, a man, a supposed leader, who called his officers at Rampart "connon fodder". unbelievable!! You don't care about you officers! Only about numbers. And I have met you!

Chief Moore,
I will say it is great to see you stand by your people, I will commend you for that.

I have seen your leadership and what type of man you are, I will only say that, If there was fairness in the way officers were treated, I would gladly step out. I have been victim of and seem the vindictiveness of you and those who surround you. You are a Deputy Chief and there is no way I will challenge you, I can't win, and you know it.

As for the perimeter and the business owner not cooperating, there has been over 50 robberies with a similar M.O., since when do we need a cooperative business owner to pursue these bandits.
Also your Supervisor seemed more concerned with "cars and calls". It was a Monday morning at 2:oo A.M. and the call load was low.

As for deployment, I do question that and I have that right.
I guess I have picked up some badits and "shooting from the hip" as so you say, It's ironic that LT. Delatorre spoke very differently about my posts. I hope you don't get in trouble LT.

Chief Moore here is a perfect example of how, when someone questions your decisiion, they are attacked.

This is a open dialogue and thats all, I may be expressing some frustrations here, but I have no other outlet.

Thank you for reading my posts, I just want there to be thought, maybe it will make a change.

The comments to this entry are closed.