On June 15/24 LAPD recieved a call about a woman carrying a knife and threatening her sister in an apartment in Panorama City. The caller said her sister was high on Methamphetamine and she was clearly afraid for her life.
LAPD arrived on scene and after attempting to get someone to open the door, they forcibly opened the door at which time the armed suspect later found to be Joanna Lua was in the room and holding a larger knife in her right hand. As she advanced toward officers she raised the knife in a threatening manner while officrers directed her to drop her weapon. The officer on the left had his pistol drawn and pointed at the armed uspect while the officer on the right side of the door had his Taser deployed and pointed at the armed suspect. When the suspect failed to respond to commands and continue to advance toward them, the officer with the pistol fired his weapon striking the suspect and the officer with the taser fired his weapon and struck the suspect as well.
The suspect was transported to hospital where she was pronounced deceased.
The question is whether or not the use of the pistol was excessive force as one officer chose to deploy and fire a less lethal weapon option. LAPD will spend a good deal of time investigating this event before they make their determinations, as their media spokesperson stated in another interview.
The simple answer is the situation contained the core elements to justify the use of force to defend. The suspect was armed.
The suspect ignored clear commands to drop her weapon.
The suspect moved toward officers while raising the knife in a threatening manner.
The suspect was well within a range that would allow her to quickly accelerate forward and successfully attack the officers causing death or serious bodiy harm to one or more officers.
There was another female inside the apartment that called police that was also in potential danger so going away and negotiating a resolution was not an option.
All of the required elements to justify use of deadly force - the pistol - are present in this scenario.
The use of Less Lethal force - the taser - is also justified for the same reasons.
The reality is that the Taser is not a guaranteed option to neutralize the thret as tasers have been proven to be innefective in some instances where the suspect is high on drugs like Methamphetamine as well as instances when the suspect is not high on anything.
Use of the deadly weapon is no less justified just because one officer decided to deploy a less lethal weapon. We can opt to question the decision of the officer with a pistol but that arguement to question his motives and justification is based solely on the choice made by the officer that deployed a taser. So if one officer's decision can be questioned, both then must be questioned. Why did the officer with the taser not deploy his firearm to defend what was clearly a potentially lethal threat at very close range.
The case must be judged by the law and whether or not there was a justification for use of deadly force present, which there clearly was based on this bodyworn camera video.
This is a tragic event. This woman's life was lost, a family torn apart, but it was her choice to threaten armed law enforcement officers with a potentially deadly knife. The officers involved will go through a living hell for the next year while the investigation takes place and beyond. But they were left with no other option than neutralize that threat.
This is the challenge we face. We must know the law, train tactics, train under stress, visualize encounters, and prepare ourselves mentally for what we may potentially face on the job.
Just so you can see how quickly someone with a knife can end your life, review this case
https://protectraining.locals.com/post/5713664/debrief-las-cruces-new-mexico
