Monday’s shooting of homicide suspect Richard Jacquez brought this year’s officer-involved shooting total to eight—half of which took place in a nine-day span this month.
San Jose police had been seeking Jacquez as one of three suspects in the Aug. 13 slaying of Christopher Maxwell Wren. A statement released by the department on Tuesday indicated that Jacquez was considered to be “possibly in possession of a TEC-9 assault weapon,” and that he may have been planning to kill a woman with him.
After a car chase that led to Kirkhaven Court, Jacquez fled and was pursued on foot. As he attempted to break into a house, Officer Jacob Morris, a 15-year veteran, shot him twice—once in the back and again as Jacquez turned. He died at the scene. Morris has since been put on “routine paid administrative leave,” per the release.
Initial reports from San Jose police indicated that Jacquez was shot reaching for his waistband, but they have since retracted that detail.
Asst. Chief Eddie Garcia defended the shooting under the 1985 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that permits officers to use deadly force when necessary to prevent the escape of a suspect believed to pose a significant threat to the officer or others.
LaDoris Cordell, the city’s recently retired Independent Police Auditor, filed a complaint on Wednesday against the San Jose Police Department. She argued that shooting raised “red flags” and would erode trust in the SJPD, especially within communities of color.
The Mercury News echoed this opinion yesterday in an op-ed.
“In an age of video surveillance everywhere, whether from cellphones or security cameras, officers have to know the peril of making stuff up,” the piece stated. “Still, there will be lingering suspicion of an attempted cover-up that the department realized it couldn't sustain. It doesn't help that police have not sustained a complaint of misconduct fueled against them for years.”
This eighth officer-involved shooting is the most for SJPD since 2011.
Dear San Jose Police,
If you happen upon a murder suspect, who has kidnapped and plans to kill a witness, and said suspect tries to flee and thus endangers my family or other families, you have 99% of the communities full support to kill this suspect, whether he is armed or not. Please do not pay attention to either the Mercury, or the racist former IPA, who are just both trying to stay relevant. If this murder suspect was was coming after their families, I am quite sure they would also want you to take the same action you did. They judge you from the comfortable perch of their ivory towers.
Thank you for the thankless job you do in keeping us safe.
SJPD shot and killed a person of color,Always say the same scenerio the suspect reached for his waist.We hear it all the time in this country. When the bodycams come to this police department they’ll be watched and hopefully us citizens can view these video footage also. Before they get editing for the purposes of protecting the bad cops, don’t get me wrong there’s some good cops in the police department ( SJPD ) I’m talking about the ones who take their positions to abuse us citizens and use lethal force to handle situations where the person is a member of the mental health community.
> Before they get editing for the purposes of protecting the bad cops,
Well, if the bodycams are going to be edited to protect bad cops, you’re basically saying that the bodycams are worthless.
Tell me again, what is the point of the bodycams?
It seems to me that bodycams are just another “technology gadget” that is supposed to replace human judgement and solve all our problems when there are so many flaws and gotchas in the system that it is never going to live up to its promise and will prove to be useless.
“San Jose police had been seeking Jacquez as one of three suspects in the Aug. 13 slaying of Christopher Maxwell Wren. A statement released by the department on Tuesday indicated that Jacquez was considered to be “possibly in possession of a TEC-9 assault weapon,” and that he may have been planning to kill a woman with him.
After a car chase that led to Kirkhaven Court, Jacquez fled and was pursued on foot. As he attempted to break into a house, Officer Jacob Morris, a 15-year veteran, shot him twice—once in the back and again as Jacquez turned. He died at the scene.”
While this is tragic, and I’m sorry he lost his life, exactly what did this Officer do wrong? I don’t get it.
Bitch he shot him in the back
The press information officer, who was not in any way associated to the incident as a participant or as a witness misspoke.
This is a symptom of a police department caving into the media’s quest for information before an investigation is complete.
You are right. The reporter gets information from the police of which the police may say something to justify whatever they have done. Will we get real truth or just the truth according to the police?
All these comments just show how lazy people are now a days, quit to comment and give their two cents before finding any truth. Jacquez did not have a gun on him and the police admitted to “offering up the explanation of he was reaching for his waist” because its common and its what the public needed to hear at the time. When in fact he was shot twice in the back and as he fell his body turned so they shot him again in the front. Now call me crazy but if i wanted to stop someone killer or not i wouldnt aim for the torso knowing that would make me a killer. Id aim for the legs or feet. In no way was this justified and anyone who thinks so should consider this man one of their family members before they speak and do us all a favor and find the facts.
DRC- I guess it is easy to defend someone who has been shot in the commission of a crime, when clearly you are ignoring the facts. The fact that this young man was wanted in connection with a murder, ran from Police, and tried to break into someone’s home is how he got himself where he is today. Why don’t YOU go talk to the family of the slain man, and look at BOTH sides of the story before you chastise others?
It really makes me angry when people like you designate yourself as Judge and Jury over things you know nothing about. No Officer that I know ever takes pleasure in killing someone. They have to live with that for the rest of their lives.
Why don’t you go take a class at the Citizen’s Police Academy so that you can get a bird’s eye view of what a Police Officer experiences before you assign yourself as a law enforcement expert?
If you wanted to stop a killer, you would shoot him in the area that would kill him or incapacitate him. Shooting in the leg or feet is idiotic.
As to justification, thankfully the Supreme Court has already ruled on aspects of police force in Tennessee v Garner and Graham v Connor. They have ruled that the police are justified in using lethal force to end a deadly threat or prevent the escape of a suspect who has used deadly force. So shooting a fleeing murder suspect is justified whether in the back or not.
Perhaps if we were not a sanctuary city we wouldn’t be such an attractive venue for homicidal suspects to infest.
So, what is Ms. Cordell’s preferred manner of dealing with a possibly armed and decidedly dangerous fleeing felon, hire a bunch of “TJ Hookers” at SJPD to go on lengthy foot chases, at great risk to themselves and the public? So, if Senor Jaquez was innocent, why was he fleeing? The sad thing is that three years from now Rick Doyle and the City Council will cave in and pay the no-count relatives of no-count “Harpo” Jaquez a ton of taxpayer money because no-one in Doyle’s office has the cojones to go to trail in the inevitable wrongful death case in which 99% of the jury pool is happy that Mr. Jaquez is no longer among the living. I agree with Weed Man’s position that pandering to the press by releasing information before the investigation is completed causes problems for everyone… except the criminal defense lawyer or the wrongful death lawyer of the “bereaved” relatives of the dead ass*ole…I mean “alleged” criminal. The problem with Weed Man’s position is that if it were followed, everyone would be screaming “cover-up!” The good guys just can’t win these days.
Yes Garcia got caught up in the same line of canned statements that have been over used. “reaching for the waistband” When in actuality the weapon was on the ground. So he must have pulled the weapon or had it out… The “reaching for the waistband” catch all has to be discarded. Just tell it like it happened please. The COP needs to loosen the grip on the PIO… Take a lesson from Chief Suhr.
Consider the information the officer had on Jacquez before the attempted arrest.
— Jacquez had been caught on camera armed with a rapid-fire, semi-automatic pistol (that possessed more firepower than the standard sidearms issued to police officers).
— He and two others were part of a murder team that planned and committed a coldblooded execution, successfully escaping the scene.
— The murder was related to drug sales — the murderers are professional criminals.
— One member of the murder team, when confronted by police a number of days after the crime, was still armed and attempted to shoot it out — with no regard for the safety of the innocent people in the area.
— That one of the killers had been identified by the police would’ve caused Jacquez to assume that he too had been, leaving him to wonder how the police cracked the case and forcing him to consider staying in town (where his risk of capture was highest) or fleeing (to a place where he might have time to plan his next move).
— That he stayed in town suggests he had an important reason for doing so (the presence of protective allies, or maybe so he could murder a suspected informant or settle some other score).
— That he stayed in town means he had to have decided how he would react to an arrest attempt, so whatever his reaction might be when confronted by police, simple fear or panic cannot be assumed the cause.
— All the evidence available supported the presumption that Jacquez was still armed.
Consider that officer’s shoot/don’t shoot dilemma.
— The killer, after failing to elude the police in his car, fled on foot despite his knowledge that the police considered him armed and dangerous (additional evidence of the depth of his desperation). That this tactic is part of an emergency plan must be considered.
— On foot the killer had nothing to lose; he might turn and shoot at any moment, round a corner and set up an ambush, bust into a residence and take a hostage, run into the street and jack a car, or make it to a house where reinforcements awaited (the third murderer was still at large).
— The officer’s sworn duty is to protect the community and he had to make a decision: find a way to overcome this desperate and dangerous killer’s resistance and put an end to the threat posed to the community (and police), or halt the foot chase and essentially let a known killer determine the outcome and body count of his flight from justice.
— Every moment the officer continued the foot pursuit brought increased risk to his life at the hands of the killer (or his unknown accomplices).
— If he stopped chasing the killer he could handoff the entirety of that mortal risk to innocent residents or other officers. This would make him completely safe.
— If he stopped chasing the killer he could avoid making himself the subject of a homicide investigation and being publicly branded a racist murderer. This would protect his future.
— To shoot and stop the killer would be to voluntarily subject himself to a criminal investigation by an office led by a politician (consequences: possibly life-altering), the whims of an irresponsible, inflammatory news media, a potentially ruinous civil suit, the smears of the lowlife community, and an investigation by the political agenda-driven wolves of the Justice Department.
— To shoot and stop the killer would be to choose the only action that was guaranteed to protect the community. With this choice, only he and the killer would pay a price.
The officer’s decision was not only the right one, it was the only one consistent with his sworn duty. And given the totality of the risk he accepted in fulfilling that sworn duty, only the most deeply depraved among us would see him as anything but a hero.
No, Cordell will not consider any such things. She knows all she needs to know: (1) Police shot and killed a person of color (2)
PIO misspoke (3) Rick Doyle settles pretrial.
Considering today’s trial cost for a murder suspect in a death penalty case, is it possible the powers that be in the Risk Assessment Department has concluded that paying of the survivors is cheaper than twenty five years of endless appeals and delay’s in the California injustices system. Then they might turn the jerk loose for any number of reasons
along the way to life time of taxpayer funded heath care sex changes, education benefits and so on.
That being said “Go Ahead Make, My Day” might be just be just what we could use a little more of. Good job SJPD!
Go away Mrs Sharpton. This act clearly reveals your bias.
And here we are…. Monday afternoon 8/24 and we have 2 homicides within a 24 hr period once again. How long will citizens allow the likes of “Judge” Cordell to hobble the PD in her web of political correctness. Its a mean and violent world out there Ladoris…. You and your friends in the tower have created an ugly environment for police to do their jobs in protecting citizens…. When does the insanity end? When do the sheep of san jose stand up and say that we have had enough? Perhaps this is the very reason why Donald Trump is surging in the polls.
The IPA is as worthless now as she was when Reed was paying her FAT Salary ! Go away already