5 ms·

Bou Bou was sleeping in a portable playpen at the foot of his parents’ bed when the Habersham County Special Response Team broke down the door to the room and t

Bou Bou was sleeping in a portable playpen at the foot of his parents’ bed when the Habersham County Special Response Team broke down the door to the room and threw a flashbang. The grenade landed on a pillow next to Bou Bou’s face. The blast blew a hole in his chest, severed his nose, and tore apart his lips and mouth. That's horrifying. I can't believe that these things are allowed to be used with so little oversight. In October, a Habersham County grand jury declined to indict the officers involved. “Some of what contributed to this tragedy can be attributed to well-intentioned people getting in too big a hurry,” the grand jury wrote in its findings. What they call "too big a hurry" I call reckless endangerment.

jMyles 12y ago
...and what they call "well-intentioned" I call "doing a job despite its moral indefensibility." (and to be clear: I'm talking specifically about pre-dawn violent raids as a measure to ostensibly enforce drug laws, not policing in general)
- kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
  What's most amazing is how smug and unapologetic the involved LEOs are when they've been interviewed on camera about this incident. One can only hope that the video is accepted as evidence in the civil case and will add a significant multiplier to the damages awarded.
  - kyrra 12y ago
    I'm guessing their lawyers have told them not to apologize (show apathy), as it may actually be worse for them in the civil suit.
    - RyJones 12y ago
      Cops in the US are immune to civil liability for acts while on duty.
      - jMyles 12y ago
        There are two flaws in this statement: 1) Police, and most public officials, are subject to qualified, not absolute, immunity. 2) Given that municipal or state governments have to pick up the check when juries find against police departments, the comment you are responding to is still sensible (I'm not saying I agree with it, only that it's not illogical in the matter that you seem to be suggesting).
    - benihana 12y ago
      This comment doesn't need to be downvoted. It's not stating anything as fact - quite the opposite - it's very clear it's just a guess. And it makes logical sense according to this [1] 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology
    - anigbrowl 12y ago
      FYI you wrote apathy when you likely meant empathy.
      - tgb 12y ago
        Apathy fits there if you take the parenthetical to be clarifying "not apologize" instead of just "apologize".
  - wl 12y ago
    The officers involved most likely were following both their training and their department's policy here. That something terrible happened as a result doesn't necessarily mean they did something wrong from a legal and professional standpoint. Police work is full of situations that are ugly, even when well-thought out policy is followed to the T. Of course, the wisdom of ever using flash bangs in policing outside of extraordinary circumstances is suspect.
    - sseveran 12y ago
      Which is of course the problem with departmental policy. We routinely see SWAT teams investigating themselves and finding that everything they did was in line with departmental policy.
      - sitkack 12y ago
        And policy is not law. We should not allow a shield of false legitimacy protect illegal actions.
        wl 12y ago
        The problem is that the law often isn't clear. You have assault, battery, manslaughter, murder, unlawful detainment, and similar laws on the books, all with varying requirements and all with various carveouts for law enforcement, self-defense, etc. They tend to be written in broad language because real life is complicated. In the end, the law in this area is generally in the form of case law created by courts in response to novel situations. The courts have to make judgement calls. In my experience, LE agencies make a lot of effort to ensure their policies conform to existing caselaw and cover the gaps in it. Sometimes they get it wrong. But more often than not, when a policy is particularly egregious, the underlying law is to blame. In the end, police have broad authority to use reasonable force to effect lawful arrests and searches. And most people don't understand just how broad that authority is under the law.
        sitkack 12y ago
bobbles 12y ago
Every single person ever booked for speeding would love to use this excuse I'm sure.
ekianjo 12y ago
> “Some of what contributed to this tragedy can be attributed to well-intentioned people getting in too big a hurry,” The things you can get away with when you have an uniform...
mattstreet 12y ago
The proper military use of flashbangs is to roll them towards the corner of a room or doorway. Not to chuck them into the room where they could land anywhere.
- base2 12y ago
  Yeah the chucking part seems where they go wrong. Normally you want to get them into the area called the fatal front, around 4 to 5 feet away right in front of the door. Your basically aiming for the floor and don't want them to go very far. I'm going to extrapolate from experience, I'm pretty sure a flash-bang in a crib is not going to have the intended effect.
  - fapjacks 12y ago
    Nope. You want them IN the room, not in front of your point man. It's called a "fatal funnel" also. All this shit goes out the window anyway (sideways pun intended) in combat. My preference is hand grenades, but you don't get many of those (or flashbangs, for that matter), so it really depends on the circumstance. Either way, you'll get kicked in the head if you toss a flashbang right inside the door.
    - base2 12y ago
      Grenades blow through almost every building material you can think of with ease. Grenades thrown in-doors are pretty loud even if you have some sort of hs/ld ear protection it's going to rock you pretty good. I may have not been clear, yes you want it in the room. Generally you want in the fatal front area, yes it's called a fatal funnel for that entire situation/entry point (and all sorts of other names). In this instance its the fatal front(in relation to that fatal funnel). Generally you want to be able to clear your nearside corners and the immediate area in front of the door. The point is not to chuck the Flashbang in too far or you are not going to get the full stun effect in areas with the highest threat. If you are 6ft like me you generally pretend you are tossing it just to your head if you were laying down. It's going to roll/bounce in most cases and go farther. In any case you are aiming for a point that is most likely going to be open. Flashbangs don't work so well if they roll under a couch or a TV stand. I guess our grenade experiences differ, If I requested a crate of grenades. I would get a crate of grenades. If you wanted to reduce things down you want to get the maximum stun in the areas where you do your fan-out to slow down anyone who might get grabby or dont need to get a good sight picture to hit you. That's all going to happen in proximity to door. in an ideal world your going to want to hit closer to the center but in less you stick your head in first or have a god-like sense of the local building construction and layout signatures you might as well throw into an area that everyone can see the flash and for the folks close in the bang.

jMyles 12y ago

...and what they call "well-intentioned" I call "doing a job despite its moral indefensibility." (and to be clear: I'm talking specifically about pre-dawn violent raids as a measure to ostensibly enforce drug laws, not policing in general)

kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
What's most amazing is how smug and unapologetic the involved LEOs are when they've been interviewed on camera about this incident. One can only hope that the video is accepted as evidence in the civil case and will add a significant multiplier to the damages awarded.
- kyrra 12y ago
  I'm guessing their lawyers have told them not to apologize (show apathy), as it may actually be worse for them in the civil suit.
  - RyJones 12y ago
    Cops in the US are immune to civil liability for acts while on duty.
    - jMyles 12y ago
      There are two flaws in this statement: 1) Police, and most public officials, are subject to qualified, not absolute, immunity. 2) Given that municipal or state governments have to pick up the check when juries find against police departments, the comment you are responding to is still sensible (I'm not saying I agree with it, only that it's not illogical in the matter that you seem to be suggesting).
  - benihana 12y ago
    This comment doesn't need to be downvoted. It's not stating anything as fact - quite the opposite - it's very clear it's just a guess. And it makes logical sense according to this [1] 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    FYI you wrote apathy when you likely meant empathy.
    - tgb 12y ago
      Apathy fits there if you take the parenthetical to be clarifying "not apologize" instead of just "apologize".
- wl 12y ago
  The officers involved most likely were following both their training and their department's policy here. That something terrible happened as a result doesn't necessarily mean they did something wrong from a legal and professional standpoint. Police work is full of situations that are ugly, even when well-thought out policy is followed to the T. Of course, the wisdom of ever using flash bangs in policing outside of extraordinary circumstances is suspect.
  - sseveran 12y ago
    Which is of course the problem with departmental policy. We routinely see SWAT teams investigating themselves and finding that everything they did was in line with departmental policy.
    - sitkack 12y ago
      And policy is not law. We should not allow a shield of false legitimacy protect illegal actions.
      - wl 12y ago
        The problem is that the law often isn't clear. You have assault, battery, manslaughter, murder, unlawful detainment, and similar laws on the books, all with varying requirements and all with various carveouts for law enforcement, self-defense, etc. They tend to be written in broad language because real life is complicated. In the end, the law in this area is generally in the form of case law created by courts in response to novel situations. The courts have to make judgement calls. In my experience, LE agencies make a lot of effort to ensure their policies conform to existing caselaw and cover the gaps in it. Sometimes they get it wrong. But more often than not, when a policy is particularly egregious, the underlying law is to blame. In the end, police have broad authority to use reasonable force to effect lawful arrests and searches. And most people don't understand just how broad that authority is under the law.
        sitkack 12y ago

bobbles 12y ago

Every single person ever booked for speeding would love to use this excuse I'm sure.

ekianjo 12y ago

> “Some of what contributed to this tragedy can be attributed to well-intentioned people getting in too big a hurry,” The things you can get away with when you have an uniform...

mattstreet 12y ago

The proper military use of flashbangs is to roll them towards the corner of a room or doorway. Not to chuck them into the room where they could land anywhere.

base2 12y ago
Yeah the chucking part seems where they go wrong. Normally you want to get them into the area called the fatal front, around 4 to 5 feet away right in front of the door. Your basically aiming for the floor and don't want them to go very far. I'm going to extrapolate from experience, I'm pretty sure a flash-bang in a crib is not going to have the intended effect.
- fapjacks 12y ago
  Nope. You want them IN the room, not in front of your point man. It's called a "fatal funnel" also. All this shit goes out the window anyway (sideways pun intended) in combat. My preference is hand grenades, but you don't get many of those (or flashbangs, for that matter), so it really depends on the circumstance. Either way, you'll get kicked in the head if you toss a flashbang right inside the door.
  - base2 12y ago
    Grenades blow through almost every building material you can think of with ease. Grenades thrown in-doors are pretty loud even if you have some sort of hs/ld ear protection it's going to rock you pretty good. I may have not been clear, yes you want it in the room. Generally you want in the fatal front area, yes it's called a fatal funnel for that entire situation/entry point (and all sorts of other names). In this instance its the fatal front(in relation to that fatal funnel). Generally you want to be able to clear your nearside corners and the immediate area in front of the door. The point is not to chuck the Flashbang in too far or you are not going to get the full stun effect in areas with the highest threat. If you are 6ft like me you generally pretend you are tossing it just to your head if you were laying down. It's going to roll/bounce in most cases and go farther. In any case you are aiming for a point that is most likely going to be open. Flashbangs don't work so well if they roll under a couch or a TV stand. I guess our grenade experiences differ, If I requested a crate of grenades. I would get a crate of grenades. If you wanted to reduce things down you want to get the maximum stun in the areas where you do your fan-out to slow down anyone who might get grabby or dont need to get a good sight picture to hit you. That's all going to happen in proximity to door. in an ideal world your going to want to hit closer to the center but in less you stick your head in first or have a god-like sense of the local building construction and layout signatures you might as well throw into an area that everyone can see the flash and for the folks close in the bang.