Archive for Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Woman courted killing, Police Chief Olin says
September 26, 2006
Advertisement
One friend said Marsha Lynn Mace was fun to be with "99 percent" of the time but didn't respond well to authority figures.
Police said Monday they believe Mace tried to get officers to shoot and kill her - and succeeded.
A Lawrence Police officer fatally shot Mace, 36, early Sunday afternoon after a roughly 4 1/2 hour standoff at trailer No. 107 at Mobile Village, 110 N. Michigan St. Police Chief Ron Olin said Mace had threatened suicide and that she fired two gunshots inside the trailer throughout the day before emerging with a small revolver about 1:23 p.m. and firing at two officers.
Olin said Mace left behind a note, and he said that she was having personal, medical and financial problems.
"I am sorry to conclude that this was the outcome she desired," he said.
It was the first shooting involving Lawrence police in nearly 11 years. Police have not yet publicly identified the officer who shot Mace. Olin said that officer was interviewed Sunday evening and has been placed on administrative leave, pursuant to the department's policies.
LPD procedures call for the department to conduct its own investigation, and the Kansas Bureau of Investigation is helping analyze physical evidence. Despite that ongoing process, Olin said Monday it appeared to him the shooting was justified.
"The preliminary information ... clearly indicates that this was not caused by anyone but the victim, and that the officer took the actions he should have at the time that he took them," Olin said.
Longtime resident
Mace was alone at the home of her father, Jim, on Sunday during the standoff, friends and neighbors said. He and Mace's 14-year-old son were out of town visiting Mace's sister.
Jim is a part-time employee at the Flamingo Club, 501 N. Ninth St., friends said.
"She's been known in this town. She was born in Lawrence and grew up here. Overall, people liked Marsha because she was very upbeat and very personable, very loving and caring," said Robert Osburn.
Mace had worked for Osburn and his brother, Richard, at Naughty But Nice Inc., 1741 Mass., for about a year until she changed jobs in 2005. The brothers have known the family for 30 years, he said.
She would often greet customers with a "Hi, hun," he said.
Video
Chief Ron Olin gives a press conference on the shooting of Marsha Lynn Mace. Enlarge video
"Marsha had one of the most outgoing personalities you'll ever see," Osburn said.
Recently, Marsha was working part time at Paradise Saloon, staff members said. Osburn said she had worked until 2 a.m. Sunday and that staff members told him she seemed to be fine.
Developer J. Stewart, who had dated Mace in the past and remained friends with her, said she worked at strip clubs as a cocktail waitress, but not a dancer. He said she was under "emotional stress" recently and was concerned about losing her home in the 400 block of Arkansas Street.
He said she recently had learned of brain-related health troubles - he wasn't sure of the exact condition - and that she did not have health insurance.
Chief's account
The standoff began shortly after 9 a.m. Sunday when an officer went to the trailer at the request of Mace's mother, who was concerned about her well-being. Olin said that Mace was "someone we know."
When the officer knocked on the door, Olin said, there was a gunshot from inside the trailer.
The officer sought cover at his patrol car and called for backup. Officers tried to contact her through a public-address system, and she was "despondent" when an LPD captain reached her by cell phone, Olin said. Eventually, three negotiators were called to the scene and negotiated with Marsh for about an hour and a half.
A tactical team was called to the scene, and eyewitnesses described seeing officers maneuvering near the trailer with weapons drawn.
About 12:30 p.m., there was a second shot from within the trailer, Olin said, but negotiators at that time remained in contact with Mace and knew she wasn't harmed.
She later emerged from the trailer and began shooting, Olin said.
Tiffany Standfield watched some of the standoff from her balcony at Northwinds Apartments, 1311 George Court, and could see police but not Mace. She said she saw police officers trying to negotiate with Mace. She said officers gave her "plenty of chances."
She said that at the end of the standoff, she heard officers yelling for Mace to put her hands up, and that another officer yelled "Gun!" three or four times. She said she heard one shot, which she assumed came from Mace because she saw two officers who were behind a squad car duck down.
She said she then heard two shots in return fire and saw one officer fire from behind the car.
"I don't think there was anything they could have done different," Standfield said. "They were just kind of doing their job, and she got a little bit over excited about it."
Olin said he could not yet give the exact number of shots fired, by whom, and when, and that witnesses were still being interviewed Monday.
Mace was flown to a Kansas City hospital with what Olin said were two gunshot wounds. She died Sunday afternoon, but police did not announce her death until Monday morning.
Olin cited Mace's "depression," but he declined to talk about what was in the note she left behind.
"We extend our condolences to the family and to the officer's family," Olin said.
LPD to review
The Kansas Bureau of Investigation and LPD detectives were still collecting evidence at the scene of the shooting as of Monday afternoon.
"The investigation is not complete," Olin said.
Kyle Smith, deputy director of the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, said Lawrence Police invited the KBI to assist in reviewing the incident, but that LPD would lead the investigation. KBI was in charge of the crime scene and had an agent present at Mace's autopsy, Smith said.
In general, Smith said, the KBI's role after a shooting is to examine the placement of evidence, angle of the bullets, and positioning of the people involved.
The last shooting involving Lawrence Police was in November 1995, Olin said. In that case, two detectives exchanged fire along the Kansas River with a suspect in a bank robbery and carjacking. One officer was injured in the shooting, and the suspect suffered two gunshot wounds before turning his gun on himself.
When to shoot
Lawrence Police policies say an officer is justified in using deadly force when "the officer reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to the officer or another person."
Standard police training dictates that if someone points a gun at an officer, the officer isn't obligated to wait for the person to shoot, said Jerry Wolfskill, director of the Regional Police Academy at Johnson County Community College.
The academy trains officers for more than a dozen police forces around the Johnson County area and for state agencies, such as the bureau of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Though the academy does not train Lawrence officers, he said all officers would use deadly force if a gun barrel were pointed at them.
That doesn't change, Wolfskill said, if the person holding the gun is trying to commit suicide.
"Even if you're getting that call of a possible suicide, it really doesn't change anything if the person comes out of the trailer shooting at you," he said.
Wolfskill said an officer in that situation would have one goal when firing: "To eliminate the threat."
City Commissioner Sue Hack, who attended Olin's Monday's press conference, said she and other commissioners had been briefed on the shooting. She said she was confident it was handled properly.
"It's a sad day," she said.
Dist. Atty. Charles Branson said his office also would review the shooting.
'Adversarial situation'
Ken Wallace, owner of Jayhawk Cafe, 1340 Ohio, said Mace had cleaned his house in the past, and they were friends. He hadn't been in contact with her much in the past year, he said.
"She was just - 99 percent of the time - she was a lot of fun to be around. She could keep the good times rolling, and once she was your friend, she'd defend you to the end," he said. "I've been with her at times when things got a little tricky, but I was able at those times to keep things under control."
Wallace said Mace probably looked at her confrontation with officers as an "adversarial situation."
"This is a woman who did not respond well to authority figures," he said.
26 September 2006
at 7:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
scootterxlch (Anonymous) says…
is the truth in a closet?
What kind of cryptic bs are you hinting at?
26 September 2006
at 8:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
christie (Anonymous) says…
I don't get it. Why is it officers are trained to shoot to kill. A leg shot or a lower torso shot would have brought this woman to her senses and perhaps she would have received the help she was needing.
Instead - cops kill. Protect and Serve? Rigggggght.
26 September 2006
at 8:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
char (Anonymous) says…
people with leg wounds can still shoot, christie.
26 September 2006
at 8:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logrithmic (Anonymous) says…
I agree Christie. Why a kill shot when they could simply just immobolize her. This is not the most egregious police killing on record, but it is a sad example of one.
For example, a man name Alpizar was gun downed by US Air Marshals after getting off a plane just before it was about to leave. The marshals shot him multiple times at point blank range in the vestibule that leads from the gate to the door of the plane. The marshals said Alpizar said he had a bomb, but Alpizar was a Latino and he probably said “I have to get off” in a heavy Spanish accent. He was gunned down while trying to return to his wife, who was held on the plane during the execution.
26 September 2006
at 8:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
amazed (Anonymous) says…
Christie - why don't you try being a cop and deal with these psychos every day? Your judgement, I'm sure, would better protect us all.
26 September 2006
at 8:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
whatdoyouthink (Anonymous) says…
I'm sure her family and loved ones will love to read your last post amazed!!!! You insensitive jerk!!!
26 September 2006
at 8:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
mom_of_three (Anonymous) says…
When she came out and shot at the officers, then it is the officer's duty to protect the public and then themselves. I am sure the officers would like another choice than to shoot a mentally ill person, but even a shot in the leg or in the arm may not incapacitate a person enough not to harm anyone else.
26 September 2006
at 8:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Topside (Anonymous) says…
Hey, I'm definitely not the biggest police defender, BUT if she has shot first they have every right in my book to bring her down with any means necessary. You kind of waive your right to safe capture once you try and kill the ones trying to help you.
26 September 2006
at 8:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…
In addition to what Momofthree said…
Not to be rude… but have any of you actually fired a gun before? Standing 30 feet away from a moving target with a weapon firing back… very very difficult to shoot a leg.
26 September 2006
at 8:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
crazyks (Anonymous) says…
If she had a health problem involving the brain, that would explain any erratic behavior she had. And the police should have known that information when they responded.
Olin acts like he's surprised that suicidal people will confront police, and ultimately want to be killed by the police, rather than do it themselves. This happens every day, somewhere in the country. I've heard of it numerous times, so it's not that unusual.
I still think using a tranquilizer gun would be a good option in cases like this. If they can figure out how to bring down a huge bear, on the defensive and full of adrenalin, without killing it, then I'd think they could figure out how to do the same thing with humans with guns.
26 September 2006
at 8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
lawrenceks66 (Anonymous) says…
Christie .. if you think it's so easy to have someone shooting at you, why don't you step up and become an officer? Funny how people always expect the police or any law enforcement person to just stand there and take it. Lot of people talk the talk … but don't walk the walk ..
26 September 2006
at 8:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Marion (Marion Lynn) says…
” She died Sunday afternoon, but police did not announce her death until Monday morning.
Right there is the key………………
Thanks.
Marion.
26 September 2006
at 8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…
I am amazed that most of this town doesn't seem to grasp the concept of excessive force. Shoot to kills seems to be the way the LPD deals with despondent people.
26 September 2006
at 9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
mommaeffortx2 (Anonymous) says…
first police shooting in eleven years, not an everyday thing around here.
She passed away in the early hours on monday not sunday.
26 September 2006
at 9:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
lonelyboy (Anonymous) says…
If she is popping off random shots with no regards to neighbors and the public then she had no respect for anyones life at this point and needed to be stopped. What happens when a stray bullet kills an innocent person like your family member drinking their morning coffee or kid playing outside. Leg wounds are for the movies , tranquilizers are for animals. Center mass.
26 September 2006
at 9:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
arlo (Anonymous) says…
lol yup right there is the key!? some great cover up im sure! This by all means was a justified shooting. why does everything have to be a scandle. She was crazy and attacked police. They have every right to proctect their own lives when they are at stake. It's to bad that she was killed but remeber this officer has to deal with the fact that he/she took a life for the rest of theirs. I highly doubt they woke up that morning just itch to shoot some crazy lady…
26 September 2006
at 9:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
okos12 (Anonymous) says…
Since Marsha Lynn Mace was already firing inside the house, why the police waited until she came out of the house? They should have outsmarted her, and not wait until she comes out with a gun. Better to fill the house with tear gas then kill her.
Better to shoot her with a tranqualizer gun when she came out, then kill her.
Instead of the police waiting a few hours, why not wait a day? It was her life and she was desponded, and she was in trouble, and she needed help.
Instead of calling the neighbors, why not call a professional mental health expert to negotiate with Marsha? Is there nothing at their disposal that could have prevented this horrible tragedy? The police should have outsmarted her. There should have been many more options to help her. Her precious life is gone. The police was wrong killing her. Instead of the police engaging in her sick game, they should have a master plan, how to peacefully bring it to a close. Marsha was somebody's Mom, and Daughter and friend and now she is dead. My deepest sympathy to her family. She did not sneak up on the police, she was in an inclosed trailer. The police should have called in negotiators with real brain power to save her life. G.G.
26 September 2006
at 9:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
OldEnuf2BYurDad (Anonymous) says…
It is my understanding that shooting for any reason other than to kill is “illegal”. Cops are not allowed to shoot a leg, etc. It's that way in every American police department. When they shoot, they are require to take a kill shot. I'm not sure of all the reasons behind it, but it is NOT unique to LPD for this to be a policy. It's nationwide.
Just be glad they are good shots. A missed shot could mean the death of some innocent three blocks away. I knew a woman who lost her husband that way: he was at a gas station blocks from where a cop got into a shoot-out with someone. He took a bullet to the head.
TOB is also correct: the public's understanding of gunplay is based on TV and movies. It's HARD to hit a target with a handgun. And, with a moving target and adrenaline flowing… it's even harder. Shooting for the torso IS in the public's best interests because it reduces the likelyhood of missing and killing someone a block away.
26 September 2006
at 9:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
amazed (Anonymous) says…
Actually, I'm not an insensitive jerk, whatdoyouthink!! i respect the police and the job they have to do. Common sense tells me that if I fire a gun at a cop, I should be prepared to die. Period. People who immediately criticize how the police respond (especially when, if you think about it, they did what one should expect) are irresponsible in their thinking and just ignorant, really. As far as this woman's family is concerned, I feel for them. She was a beautiful and obviously very troubled person.
26 September 2006
at 9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
rednekbuddha (Kelly Powell) says…
right on lonelyboy….plus center mass does not constitute a death sentance….shoot to maim is the operative word.
26 September 2006
at 9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
estespark (Anonymous) says…
Leg wounds? Tranquilizer darts? I suppose if a criminal in a stolen car is trying to run over a cop you folks think the officer should just shoot out the tires.
26 September 2006
at 9:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
lonelyboy is mostly right.
Marsha had 4 1/2 hours to think what would happen if she came out of that trailer with a gun.
A person shooting a gun at the police has made their intentions crystal clear.
26 September 2006
at 9:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
optimist (Anonymous) says…
Those of you who are second guessing the officer in this situation are absolute morons. I'd like to phrase my response in a less offensive way but simply moron is the only word I can think of that is “G” rated.
None of us have ever been in this situation. There is no way at the time for the officer to know her intent. You have no idea how far she was willing to go to ensure they killed her. You don't know how close she was to the officer, what her posture was at the time or what the back stop was. What if the officer would have attempted to hit her in a “non-vital” area and missed. That bullet may have traveled far enough to land in an adjacent neighborhood hitting an innocent.
Officers are taught to aim center mass for many reasons: a) It's a bigger target thus increasing the likelihood of hitting the target. b) Removing the threat quickly saves lives. c) Aiming for a smaller area and missing risks the lives of people blocks away.
Some people would question anything the police do no matter what the outcome. The charge here is that they should have shot her in the leg or arm. Assuming they had there is still no guarantee that she would have lived. Severing an artery in either could just as likely have been fatal and for a period of time she would have still been able to fire on police and possibly kill one of them in order force police to kill her.
Given the information available at the time there is no reason to believe the officer acted inappropriately and in fact I suggest he did exactly what he should have done. I infer from the fact that two shots struck her that at least that many shots were fired at her. Given that fact I suggest she was likely shooting at the officers or closing quickly and in a threatening posture and they feared for their safety and that of others nearby and they felt forced to act urgently to stop her.
All parties to this incident are victims including the officers forced to kill her. I can't imagine any officer wants to shoot anyone and to find out that this woman provoked a confrontation for the sole purpose of ending her life (death by cop). This incident will weigh on him the rest of his life. It will have an effect on him, his family and probably his job for many years to come. I hope he is able to come to grips with it and know that most of us have enough sense to understand the situation for what it was and do not judge him as a bad guy for doing what he had to do. Where is your compassion for the officer's emotional wall being and that of his family?
26 September 2006
at 9:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
hk45 (Anonymous) says…
Sybil, I wish I lived in your fantasy world, because it must be a wonderful place. You really need a touch of reality to see how the real world functions.
26 September 2006
at 9:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…
“With all the recent hype about the LPD being trained to deal with the mentally ill that they might try to practice some of their new found skills.”
I would bet they are still told to shoot to kill. If I am getting fired at I don't really give a damn if the person is sane or insane.
26 September 2006
at 9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
promitida (Anonymous) says…
When it comes down to it, very few of you have any idea what you're talking about. And I think before anyone passes judgement, you need to give it time. Good gracious. You all like to get fired up. Police brutality!!! Uneccessary force!!! Give me a break.
26 September 2006
at 9:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Sacerdotal (Anonymous) says…
NEVER point a gun at the police. I do agree, however, they probably could have gassed the place to slow her down and, perhaps, flush her out. Very sad situation for all concerned.
26 September 2006
at 9:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
Sybil - BTK Killer
When you find one of these mental health professionals, please spend some time with them personally.
“Why on earth couldn't the LPD take a woman alive from a frickin trailer?”
Maybe because she was throwing lead…..
26 September 2006
at 9:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jafs (Anonymous) says…
Interesting issue. I think the officers acted in accordance with their training and were justified in that regard. However, some of the ideas above may have some validity. For example, tranquilizer darts might be effective at preventing the threat without killing the person. This would help not only the victim of the shooting, but also the officers involved. As several others have pointed out, it is traumatic to take a life, even when it seems to be justified. So shouldn't we do everything we can to reduce that trauma and save lives? This woman seems to have been depressed, and after getting some help, might have regained her desire to live. Wouldn't that have been a better outcome for all concerned?
26 September 2006
at 9:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
amazed (Anonymous) says…
Duh, Sybil, did you not hear that she was shooting a gun at them? Give a rest.
26 September 2006
at 9:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
Tranquilizer darts are not an instantaneous stopper. If you have ever watched an animal after being shot, they stumble around, then they fall over, and then they are out.
If that animal had a handgun during this time, I am sure you would hear Pop, Pop, Pop, Pop, Pop……….
26 September 2006
at 9:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jonas (Anonymous) says…
“Posted by whatdoyouthink (anonymous) on September 26, 2006 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm sure her family and loved ones will love to read your last post amazed!!!! You insensitive jerk!!!”
Yes, because everything law enforcement, or the rest of us, do or say should be acted around how the family or loved ones will react, because of all the people, they sure are the ones least likely to be partial or biased, aren't they?
26 September 2006
at 9:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
IceManMK (Anonymous) says…
The_Original_Bob and optimist couldn't be more correct with their comments. When you are in a “gun battle” or anything resembling what LPD experienced with this woman, one of the cardinal rules of gun safety is to “know your backstop and beyond”… that's one of the main reasons why you aim at center body mass. Trying to hit a moving arm or leg from 30-50 feet away is impossible. What if they shot at her hand and it went flying by and ended up striking a child in a backyard a block away… then you would all being calling for the head of the officer that should have just shot her in the chest. Plus the fact that those inquiries as to why they didn't shoot her in those places are irrelevant… she shot at officers… once that gun is pointed at them they aren't going to hesitate… let alone if someone fires off a couple shots at them. Those of you attempting to place blame on the police department need to find something else to do with your time. That's just down right stupid.
26 September 2006
at 9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
TheEleventhStephanie (Anonymous) says…
The cops should have just used a water gun, or at the worst, one of those guns that shoots ping-pong balls. Even though she shot at the cops, it would have turned out so much better if this woman had been given the chance to fire at more people. Neighbor kids, old people, puppies….Come on, you nitwits.
—>Those of you who are second guessing the officer in this situation are absolute morons. I'd like to phrase my response in a less offensive way but simply moron is the only word I can think of that is “G” rated.
Optimist—I second that emotion.
I am truely sorry for the loss her family and friends have suffered, but I find it hard to believe that the cops made a mistake here. Shoot at a cop, prepare for return fire. Isn't that common sense?
26 September 2006
at 9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jrlii (Anonymous) says…
For once the police were somewhat restrained.
While it was a fatal shooting, they didn't riddle her with bullets as often happens.
As I understand it the Johnson County Sheriff's department is trained to empty their guns into a target, reload and do it again on the command “He's got a gun!”
26 September 2006
at 9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
okos12 (Anonymous) says…
What will the police tell her child? We killed your Mom because she was in mental distress, and we called in the neighbors! to negotiate, and when that did not work, and she came out shooting, we shot her in response.
How to deal with the mentally ill? or mentally distressed? That is the question?
How about having a team of experts ready who is ABLE to negotiate. Eventually she would of got tired or go to sleep. Why not wait it out. Anything, but killing her. The job of the police is to assure a safe outcome. Shooting her is an outrage.
26 September 2006
at 9:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Marion (Marion Lynn) says…
the thing that many of you are forgetting here is that Marsha Mace was mentally unsound and you cannot reason with metnally unsound people.
That's why they call them mentally unsound.
I think that the PD has a perception problem now though in that it waited far to long to announce the death.
Thanks.
Marion.
26 September 2006
at 10:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
I don't remember reading that the police did anything that didn't constitute waiting. She is the one that came out shooting. After she fired on initial contact. She was the LPD's problem. They couldn't leave her.
26 September 2006
at 10:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…
You want to call people who disagere with you “Moron?' Here's one: narrow minded idiot incapable of thinking outside the box.
The development of non-lethal weapons, which could have been employed in this case, is big business and those develpers' biggest cutomers are law enforcement. If shooting to kill in all situations where a gun is pressnt were the goal of law enforcement rather than the preservation of life, law enforcement agencies wouldn't bother with companies that make non-lethal weapons.
The blood thirsty nature of so many posters here is is sickening. I bet you're all for punishment too.
26 September 2006
at 10:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
Marion - I think that the black helicopter that they use to deliver their press releases was down, so there was a slight delay.
26 September 2006
at 10:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Andini (Anonymous) says…
I think the reason that the police waited to announce the depth is because they wanted to make sure all of the family was notified first.
26 September 2006
at 10:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Rhoen (Anonymous) says…
So sad - That poor woman…
It's obvious that authority figures didn't deal well with HER, rather than the reverse noted in the story.
Health issues … no insurance … marginally employed … mental illness …
Local Authority Figures would no doubt hope that others in those categories - what they apparently see as “human clutter” who populate Lawrence - would take a page out of this lady's book, do themselves in, and alleviate the town of the responsibility for helping them.
This would leave more time and resources for art shows, planning meetings, benefit dances / dinners / cocktails / golf, development studies, sculptural displays, task-force studies, grand openings, roundabout building, post-office clogging parties, and all of those other goings-on that make this such a nice and fun place to live for some.
Condolences to this lady's friends and family. So sad that her life had to end so soon and so tragically.
26 September 2006
at 10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Confrontation (Anonymous) says…
It doesn't make sense to say the cops should've “waited it out,” since they did. They waited until she came out of the trailer and decided to try and take someone else's life just because she was sad and pathetic. If this woman were still alive, there's a good chance she'd have one of these “episodes” again and possibly kill other people. We should all be sending thank you letters to the police department. Afterall, it could have been you or your family member that she fired at next.
26 September 2006
at 10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
DanFreako (Anonymous) says…
I actually knew Marsha; she was a very caring person that is leaving behind a 14 y/o son. She was always the life of the party and was cheerful to most everyone she meet. She did put her decision to die in the hands of the police, that is something that the police are going to deal with the rest of there lives. I really feel bad that she choose to end her life in such a matter; I feel for her son that now has the stigma attached to him for the rest of his life. Commenting insensitively about Lawrence PD and excessive use of force is a little immature. It was her intentions and LPD had not a lot leeway in the matter, she was a person that had many hard breaks and did not deserve her final curtain call. Maybe peace will befall her now, RIP Marsha.
Daniel Shoemaker
26 September 2006
at 10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ModSquadGal (Anonymous) says…
Of course it is a tragedy for Ms. Mace and her family and friends. No one is denying that. And our hearts naturally go out to them in dealing with this horrible incident.
However, I cannot imagine any police officer waking up in the “mood” to kill someone. Can you imagine how the officer who shot her must feel? Their job is to protect people. That is what the LPD officers were trying to do, but they had to harm Ms. Mace in order to continue to protect the public. They did negotiate with her for hours, and they did not go rushing in either of the two times she fired her gun in the trailer. Nobody here was at the scene (well, probably not anyway), and therefore nobody can truly know what went on. The officers were doing what they have been trained to do, and Ms. Mace was inciting them to shoot. Nobody likes the outcome of this incident, but if you are stupid/demented/depressed enough to come out of your house shooting at the cops, you should expect to be shot in return.
As for WHERE they shot her, that is standard policy, as many have said. I'm sure the officer hopes he will only wound the person, but in the heat of the moment and with a moving shooting target, you have to just take your shot and stop errant bullets from flying around hitting innocent people.
Only 2 shootings of this nature in 11 years sounds like a pretty damn good record to me. Some people are never satisfied no matter HOW the police respond.
26 September 2006
at 10:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
crazyks (Anonymous) says…
I really don't see why tranquilizers couldn't be used in cases like this. Yes, they're primarily used on animals, but there's no reason they couldn't be used on people. They do it all the time in hospitals, when someone becomes unruly or aggressive. And some of them take effect very quickly.
Seems it could at least be an option to be considered. It could possibly have saved a life.
26 September 2006
at 10:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
acg (Anonymous) says…
The cops are trained to shoot for center mass for a reason. TOB said it best. A leg shot is a very difficult shot to hit. If that cop misses where does that bullet go? (oldenuf, I'm sorry about your friend). Plus, when the cops are in a situation like this they're concerned with neighbors and bystanders. They can't wound that lady and just hope they did enough to save the lives of potential innocent victims. Once they're faced with the inevitable, they have no other choice but go for a torso shot, and I for one am glad for it. Ya'll know how I feel about cops. I don't like 'em and I don't trust 'em, but I think in this instance, they did what they had to do. So stop bustin' their balls about it sybil, you especially, you freak. Not everyone in the world can have a coke and a puppy. Sometimes people get shot and that's the harsh reality of life. If you're shooting at a crowd of cops from the doorway of a dingy trailer in sh*tsplat, Kansas, you can bet your sweet butt you're going to get shot. Life's a b*tch, you know?
26 September 2006
at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Marion (Marion Lynn) says…
Andini wrote:
“Posted by Andini (anonymous) on September 26, 2006 at 10:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think the reason that the police waited to announce the depth is because they wanted to make sure all of the family was notified first.”
Marion writes:
Maybe but playing Devil's Advocate here, the possilbility exists and it will be mentioned by many others besides myself, that the 12-18 hours which elapsed between the time of the shooting and the announcement of the death may well have given the LPD time to get its stories straight.
Further, it is quite common for the LPD and the LJW to indicate for example, a death in a traffic accident without naming the deceased so although your theory reads as sound, in light of experience, does not hold water.
Thanks.
Marion.
26 September 2006
at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cutny (Anonymous) says…
Olin needs to go. He is secretive at best and dishonest at worst. This is the second time in his tenure that a parent calling for assistance has had their child shot by the police.
boot olin now
26 September 2006
at 10:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
scary_manilow (Anonymous) says…
The Lawrence PD DOES have nonlethal weapons at their disposal… Why they chose not to use them in this case is a matter of specualtion— I prefer to think they were just trying to justify their own testosterone-fueled egos, but that's just me.
Also, having a dad who's a cop, I know for a FACT that these guys have extensive training in “shoot to disable” techniques— The fact that they killed her outright should cost someone their badge. Seriously. There was no need for this woman to die.
But I guess as long as Ron “Supercop” Olin is in charge of things, no one will have to answer for these actions, so why bother complaining? Gotta love our pig cops.
26 September 2006
at 10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bjamnjm (Anonymous) says…
Those cops, they should have done a number where they come in with hovercraft and cryogenically freeze the whole trailer, take it down to CDIC and thaw her out in a 100 years when they've discovered a cure for what ails her. Wait, wait a minute, how about if the cops did a number like Mel in Lethal Weapon and jump out there with a gun in his mouth and dare her to pull the trigger before he does. The cops did all they could, her mom called them over and they haven't had to shoot anyone like this in 11 yrs. All this about the cops should have done one thing or another is goofy.
26 September 2006
at 10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
acg (Anonymous) says…
awww, danfreako and mrramirez, did I offend your hippy sensibilities? Did that get your birks and dreads all in an uproar? I guess you would rather the cops stand around out there, let her empty her gun and hope that she doesn't hit anyone? And then maybe they should've taken her out for ice cream.
26 September 2006
at 10:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
'One friend said Marsha Lynn Mace was fun to be with “99 percent” of the time but didn't respond well to authority figures.'
With all the police bashing, she wasn't the only one!
26 September 2006
at 11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bangaranggerg (Anonymous) says…
any reason for that comment DanFreako or are you just sadistic and unreasonable?
26 September 2006
at 11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justthefacts (Anonymous) says…
Man I can't believe how many people think that a woman who shoots at the police did not deserve to get shot back in return!! Mentally ill? Yes. Sad? Yes, very. But avoidable? Probably not!
Should the police have stood by and let her shoot the place up (or at them) without returning fire? Nope!? What if she hit the nieghbor's kid? THEN would it be ok to open fire? With bb's?
She came outside and start shooting. At that point, nothing but returning fire was appropriate, to protect the public and the officers being fired upon!
26 September 2006
at 11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
acg (Anonymous) says…
How can you walk around and be so stupid? I mean, can you bathe yourself? I have my doubts. This woman, regardless of her sex, race or mental capacity opened fire on police officers. Are you getting that freakboy? She opened fire, with a loaded gun. Not a cap gun, not a pellet gun or a stun gun but a loaded freaking gun. She fired first, from the point they walked up her steps to try and offer her some assistance. Why are we even debating this? She fired at cops, they shot her, she's dead, end of story. She got what she had coming to her. Is it sad? Absolutely! Is it awful for her family? I'm sure it is, I've been there. See, four years ago, cops had to shoot my cousin, who was acting like an ass, waving around a gun. He's dead, and it was sad, but he got what he got because he played a dangerous game and lost. So did she. I don't understand all of the uproar. What would have had the officers do? If you have such a better answer as how to handle police tactical procedures in this sort of incident, please enlighten the rest of us. You're obviously an expert. Oh and as for my parents getting hit by a train, that's nice. That's the sort of response I would expect from someone as dim as yourself. You can't handle harsh reality so you resort to wishing death on someone's parents. That's not at all the behaviour of a junior high school punk.
26 September 2006
at 11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bangaranggerg (Anonymous) says…
well as a community we should make sure nothing bad ever happens to anyone… we're working on it. Mental health however is not something easily delt with on a sociatal level without disturbing freedoms we've all learned to love.
26 September 2006
at 11:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
crazyks (Anonymous) says…
One of the problems may be the police themselves. Just try telling the police that you think someone may be a danger to themselves or others, before it actually happens.
This happens often in abuse cases. And the police will tell you they can do nothing until the person actually becomes violent, actually becomes a threat. It's difficult if not downright impossible to get someone committed involuntarily, even if you know they need it.
26 September 2006
at 11:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kosmo513 (Anonymous) says…
I just had to make a comment in reference to christie, who asked why not shoot them in the “leg or lower torso” instead of killing them. I was in law enforcement in the K.C. area. Have you ever even fired a handgun christie? If you had, you would know how hard it is to aim at a leg or arm even when the situation is calm and no adrenaline is flowing. Besides that, even if someone managed to be the best crack shot in the world and hit them in the leg, arm, or lower torso, if the subject is wanting to shoot you BEFORE they get shot, you can bet they are REALLY going to want to shoot you AFTER they are shot in the leg or lower torso. That is why police are taught to “eliminate the threat”, in other words, use deadly force to “center mass”, the chest area. It is amazing how naive some people truly are. Hope this helps in some small way.
26 September 2006
at 11:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
evera (Anonymous) says…
I didn't know her but I do live about 5 trailers down I have say that there had to have been a better way to deal with this they had 4 hours to use a non lethal forces. I agree that she came out and opened fire as a result was shot that is how police deal with that situation. I can not understand the ones that say how sorry they feel for the police that shot her but have no sympathy for her taking the job of a police officer has these risks and they know that as much as she knew the risks of firing on the police. I am not saying police did the wrong thing I just think that there has to be some tactics that would have got her out of that trailer safe. There are alot of kids in this nieghborhood that have to hear about this and may have even witnessed this or atleast heard the police shoot this woman. The reality of the world that things like this happen daily I just wish that we can learn from the mistakes and try and improve the way that they are handled. It is idealogic to think that they will always end with no casulties but is something that we should strive for.
26 September 2006
at 11:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
IceManMK (Anonymous) says…
justthefacts said:
Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on September 26, 2006 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Man I can't believe how many people think that a woman who shoots at the police did not deserve to get shot back in return!! Mentally ill? Yes. Sad? Yes, very. But avoidable? Probably not!
Should the police have stood by and let her shoot the place up (or at them) without returning fire? Nope!? What if she hit the nieghbor's kid? THEN would it be ok to open fire? With bb's?
She came outside and start shooting. At that point, nothing but returning fire was appropriate, to protect the public and the officers being fired upon!
––-
There is really no way to argue this point… I'll happily point out that there have been instances around the country through time when officers used force that was not necessary… but here you have an instance where a subject came out of a residence and shot at officers… they are justified in shooting back and did the right thing… no matter what anyone else says. Regardless of anyone's personal opinion about Olin, the LPD, the woman's mental state, etc… she shot at them… what would you do in that situation if you were an officer?? Bottom line… someone points a gun and/or shoots a gun in the presence of an officer, he/she will return fire and be justified in doing so… oh, and they sure as hell aren't going to try and shoot and arms and legs that are moving around… that's ridiculous. Center body mass is what they are trained to shoot at to minimize risk to the surrounding area… and those who think center body mass is an automatic death certificate are wrong.
-M
26 September 2006
at 11:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justthefacts (Anonymous) says…
Anyone who has ever been shot at gets to have an opinion on this topic. Anyone else (no matter how kind or good your motives) really doesn't know what they would (or should) do in such a situation. Until you have been shot at by another human being, it's probably not a topic you have enough information about to have an informed opinion. This talk of merely wounding or shooting back with non-lethal means is perhaps well-intentioned, but not coming from someone very well informed; those things do not stop/work in cases where a shooter is firing on you.
26 September 2006
at 11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
IceManMK (Anonymous) says…
justthefacts… I could not agree more with every comment you have made. I have gone through rigorous law enforcement firearms training in a different jurisdiction and it sounds to me like they reacted appropriately.
26 September 2006
at 11:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
werekoala (Anonymous) says…
Does police brutality happen? Sure.
Around here? It's pretty rare.
Was this a case of it? Hell no.
All these armchair quarterbacks who want to gas her, or tranq her, or have a team of 10 hostage negotiators sitting around idle at all times (when we don't have working sewers fer chrissake)? You're being unrealistic. Tazers, etc are great for dealing with unarmed subjects. Someone firing bullets at random into a populated area has passed a threshold beyond which use of deadly force is unfortunately the only immediate remedy we have available.
Hopefully, in the future, there will be some instantly-effective non-lethal disabling device out there that is just as effective as a bullet. I guarantee you that for the rest of his life, the officer who shot her will wish there was, so he does not have her life on his conscience. But here and now, there is only one way to immediately end a threat to the lives of officers and civilians.
Does it suck? Hell yes, this isn't a Disney movie. Does blaming the officers for the only possible conclusion to this whole damn tragic affair make things better? Not in the slightest. And yeah, a cop gave you a hard time because he caught you speeding or smoking reefer. That sucks, and you don't like the “pigs”.
Fair enough, but that doesn't justify heaping conspiracy theories and slanders and shoulduves upon guys who did the best they could with an impossible situation, and are just trying to protect themselves, and the citizens they serve, and get home in one piece at the end of the day.
My sympathies to the victim's family and the officers involved.
26 September 2006
at 12:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
concernedparent (Anonymous) says…
Its not like this lady walked out of her trailer and they just shot her. She was shooting at people. Police officers probably. But just think how close trailers are in a court and the safety of everyone, not just the officers. She shot (more than once) first, and unfortunately, the consequences were not good.