Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Mona Shield Payne / Special to the Sun
Metro Police investigate after a man was shot and killed by a detective shortly before 1 p.m. July 1 in the 5500 block of Alexander Drive as two detectives tried to question him in a sexual assault and domestic violence case they were working.
Friday, July 3, 2009 | 1:58 p.m.
Officer-involved shooting
Metro Police on Friday identified an officer who fatally shot a man Wednesday afternoon in the northwest Las Vegas Valley.
Authorities said Officer Jeremy Hendricks, 30, fired at the man after he and another detective tried to question him in connection with another case they were working. The shooting happened at about 1 p.m. Wednesday near the El Jen Convalescent Center, 5538 Duncan Drive, near Alexander Drive, Helen Street and Rancho Drive.
Hendricks has been with Metro Police since August 1998 and is assigned to the Crimes Against Youth and Family Section. Police have said the detectives were working on a case involving domestic violence battery and sexual assault with a child under the age of 14.
Hendricks has been placed on paid administrative leave until the investigation into the shooting is completed. This is the 10th officer-involved shooting in the Las Vegas Valley this year, police spokesman Officer Bill Cassell said.
Police said that after questioning the man -- whose name hasn't been released by the Clark County Coroner's Office -- the detectives went to place him under arrest but the man ran away. After a chase, police said a physical altercation ensued and Hendricks fired his handgun twice, fatally injuring the man.
Do they automatically do an alcohol and drug test when an officer shoots someone? Just wondered, he does work for METRO>
I'm just glad that the officer did not get hurt during the pursuit. All the man had to do was stop and let them finish arresting him for domestic violence battery and sexual assault with a child under the age of 14. The charges are very serious, it's not like he was caught shoplifting at the mall. He knew exactly what would happen if he ran away from the police. Good job Metro!!! Thank you for keep our streets clean from scumbags!
Excellent post starrynite. I feel the same way. You run from the cops, you've got something to hide. We all know LV Metro doesn't mess around, and I love it that way. As a father of two daughters, one less sexual offender off the streets is music to my ears, dead or alive.
Metro Police do a good job in a dangerous and demanding profession. Thanks Metro.
"Good job Metro!!! Thank you for keep our streets clean from scumbags!"
That should be "alleged scumbags" for those of you who weren't there, didn't see it, or have close personal knowledge of the accusers.
Filling in the blanks without waiting for the facts puts you in a category of almost a lynch mob. Facts don't matter, on with the show!
starrynite, skemp -- neither of you have a shred of credibility here.
"Good job Metro!!! Thank you for keep our streets clean from scumbags!" - continued.
Detective Hendricks executed this man, shot him in the back at seven to eight feet. Check out the eyewitness report at http://www.lvrj.com/news/49838062.html
This Metro representing us took it on himself to be judge, jury and executioner. He should be treated as what he is -- a criminal, then given what the SUSPECT was entitled to, due process on the way to a conviction of murder.
KillerB - talk about filling in the blanks and not having a shred of credibility.
Were you personally there to witness this event? Did the "eyewitness" see the entire event, from start to finish? Or, did they just see the very end of it?
Unless you know the facts, how can you be so certain it was an execution?
I've asked before, will you be willing to "man up" and apologize to Deputy Hendricks and the others that you have insulted once the facts are known, if they show it wasn't an execution?
VOR -- already answered you in the other thread.
Shooting a man in the back is an execution. What would you call it? And this was confirmed by the eyewitness in the RJ's article.
Cops killing us is a nationwide problem we had all better be paying attention to. A good start is Radley Balko's "Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America" found at http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_...
KillerB - there is more to the story than what has been released or published, there always is. I believe when the facts are presented it will be come apparent the Detective was justified in his decision to shoot.
If I'm wrong I'll be the first to admit it. If you're wrong, will you be able to admit it and apologize to Deputy Hendricks?
VOR -- all that really matters is the truth. Let's hope that's what lies at the end of this story.
As for your last question, you seem to need a confrontation to prove you're right. I don't have that need, and I decline your offer of escalation.
KillerB - no, I don't need a confrontation to prove I'm right. But I haven't said Hendricks is an executioner and/or murderer. Have you? Don't you think it only proper to apologize when one is wrong?
As for your first statement, I couldn't agree more, all that matters is the truth.
But then the question is what is one willing to accept as the truth, the RJ article from an unidentified witness or the testimony presented to an inquest jury and their resulting determination.
This is horrible. I can't believe everyone is using the nature of the charge to justify a bad shooting. It is ILLEGEL for a police officer to shoot someone in the back, especially if they are unarmed. If an officer has to shoot an armed bank robber in the back to prevent him from shooting a bank teller, it's allowed. Also, when the witness came forward, the cops told her to "shut up or be arrested." That may be why her name isn't in the article... but then there's probably a good reason to threaten someone who hasn't broken any laws.
Aren't you cop fanboys tired of this yet? We've had Washington investigating Metro because the officer shootings and taser electrocution deaths skyrocketed last year. We had a cop shoot an ICE CREAM LADY who didn't speak english right in face in front of her children... because she had a knife in her hand and was 30 feet away. Then they called McCarren and tried to close the area to news chopper fly-bys to hide the truth. When the newspapers got hold of this, the next morning Metro ***ADMITTED*** two things: 1) that it was a cover-up and 2) it was a mistake.
In summary, that cop was TRAINED not to shoot people in the back. Then he shot an UNARMED man in the back. 3-to-1 odds against an unarmed perp is not a shooting situation. Sorry!
VOR - The "you weren't there" bit works both ways. If it somehow comes back that the guy is guilty, will you apologize to everyone here the same way you expect KillerB to?
skemp - Having kids doesn't make taking an unarmed man's life justified in the least. Can I shoot you in the back to protect MY kids? Without a trial or investigation AT ALL? Oh nevermind, you have rights. Bet the dead guy wishes he deserved rights...
Oh and BTW, whenever there is a hearing over a fatal shooting, the cop gets off. This is a matter of rule. In Henderson a few years ago, 5 cops stopped a 90 year old man walking home from a casino around 3:00am. They asked him where he was going. He was "belligerant". So they beat him until he had broken ribs and a broken jaw. He had a huge sign on the front of his house for months before Metro offered him a cash settlement. Those officers should be in PRISON. But no judge is going to rule against a cop, so they all got "a written reprimand" in their files. Harsh.
Neuromancer - yes, if it turns out the shooting if found to be criminal, I will apologize to all of the persons who posted. I will be out of town when the inquest is held, so I won't know the results until the following Monday, so please don't start "beating me up" right away.
It also seems you tend to distort facts. The facts showed the Ice Cream lady made threats with the knife. Remember all those who said she didn't have a knife, but the knife attributed to her was identical to another knife in her truck?
You also seem to be walking on "thin ice" when you say it's illegal to shoot someone in the back.
As I've said before, I'm sure there will be much more information made available at the inquest. At least we will know what the Detective's story is.