Minn. man killed by deputy after day of swimming

Waldron, who has been a deputy with the department for 10 years, has been placed on standard paid administrative leave, and the investigation could take six to eight weeks, Skoogman said. The BCA said Waldron has never been disciplined. Waldron's resume indicates he also worked as a jailer with the department. He was promoted to investigator in 2004 and focuses on narcotics, sexual assaults and robberies, Skoogman said.

Waldron also served as a patrol officer with three small-town police departments and has a degree in law enforcement from Minnesota State University, Mankato. He's taken several continuing education training courses, including training in use of deadly force, according to his personnel records.

A working phone number for Waldron could not be found and his parents, whose house he visited on Tuesday, declined comment.

Did you miss those? Just sayin'.....

In an ongoing investigation, neither the officer nor the department will speak to the press. Someone (the BCA?) released the information given in this article, but they will not comment further. The press gets what they can from public records, which is probably got "all kinds of fantastic details" about the decedant, not to mention his father was sharing personal information as well.

Give the average ass an badge and gun, you get a huge pain in the ass

Did you miss those? Just sayin'.....

Read what I said and read it again... Do you miss something?

Police live a dangerous life and put their lives on the line constantly. However, I can see no justification for shooting to death an unarmed man. It sounds like the young man had no idea the cop was a cop until the last couple of seconds of his life. However, the actual truth may be difficult to piece together.

The young man lost his life. That is too much of a price to pay. I hope the investigation is complete and unbiased.

How tragic the loss for this young mans family. I find it hard to understand how that cop could shoot an unarmed young man.

Did the deputy identify himself?

How did the fight start?

Wearable video cameras, folks. They are dirt cheap and light. There's no reason why we shouldn't have every single law enforcement person in this nation wearing one.

Then, when a case like this happens, we can just go back to review exactly what happened.

I America, even a routine contact with the police can end up with you getting shot.

Did you miss those? Just sayin'.....

Read what I said and read it again... Do you miss something?

Nope, I read your post, which is why I replied. All you're going to get is what is in the article unless some "leak" in the department calls him ....what was it you said...."a paranoid-trigger-happy cop". Until then, you've got all the "personal" information anyone is going to give to the press. Too bad.

All you're going to get is what is in the article

You are right about that GeminiGirl, but lets keep going with this just for fun;

My point is that when all the reporting is said and done, we know all the personal details on the 'civilian suspect/victim' (media has no problem digging out all the dirt on this person and throwing him under the bus) YET very little, vague details on the trigger happy cop, seemingly protecting him (what you attribute to chance)

I say, forget the poor unarmed victim for a second I/we want to know EVERYTHING about this psycho cop. Murder is murder and it would be nice if the media would stop protecting the cops

IMO

Nels, I think a good use of some law enforcement grants would be to begin equipping law enforcement officers with body-mounted video.

It would be easy to look at Mr. Heilmans' record and the fact that he was wrestling with the officer prior to being shot and form one opinion. Someone else might look at the fact that he was only wearing swim trunks and the officer was not in uniform and draw a different opinion. Either way it would only be speculation, at least based on the information presented in this story..

Defense lawyers and prosecutors will speculate, and so will jurors. And the course of Deputy Waldrons' life will be decided on the basis of such speculation.

Speculation in this case and thousands of other cases is entirely unnecessary, given the technology we have available in the 21st century. With multimillion-dollar trials & lawsuit settlements, as well as the effect on so many thousands of lives, what are we waiting for?

There needs to be some serious change of attitude within the police force

I'm also afraid this may drive away the few remaining good peace officers from the departments.

...more and more, it seems that a majority of cops are trigger-happy bullies...

When was this not the case?

BV,

well here we are its official, we agree on something! Lets not make a habit of it. Okay?

Agreed.

You mean besides the whole wrestling with the cop bit?

Look: These guys are taught....it is drilled into their heads....that if they draw a gun, it is to kill - not wound, not maim. To take down and kill a suspect. They are also taught to defend if attacked, and I would think that a fight that has both men on the ground would be viewed, in a police officer's mind, as a literal fight for his life. Who is to say that he would not have been shot had the decedant gotten hold of the officer's weapon? They - the police officers - have to remember that every single time they step out of their front door to head to work.

What bothers me are these questions. Did the officer identify himself as a police officer when he confronted the other man? "Badge on the belt" doesn't count. What will be the blood alcohol level of the man killed? His father admits he used to have a drinking problem and was again "drinking a little"...and friends say he "didn't have enough" to be driving drunk. Really? I've had friends literally staggering drunk who insisted they didn't have enough to impair them, and would watch as other friends agreed that I was just being too stuffy when insisting the staggering one didn't drive (esp. when I took the keys). This man also had a previous brain injury, and if it was near the frontal lobes, there goes judgement, right out the window. Impaired judgement combined with "a little bit" of alcohol can make a brain injured patient completely irrational - and that's a fact of medicine, not my take on things. Why did this man feel the need to start wrestling with anyone over being asked to see his driver's license? What led up to that point?

No one in this situation is completely innocent. Four shots? That is a bit much, esp. at close range when one to the chest (depending on caliber of the bullet) would probably take most folks down. However, there are quite a few unanswered questions, and for the sake of both men (and families), I hope they get answered.

These guys are taught....it is drilled into their heads....that if they draw a gun, it is to kill - not wound, not maim. To take down and kill a suspect.

I disagree. Officers are taught to take control of the situation. Drawing a weapon is usually sufficient, but there are times when matters require the weapon to be discharged. The use of deadly force, however, would not be warranted unless it was clear that the life of the peace officer or lives of others were in jeopardy. An unarmed suspect could be subdued with a wounding, non-life-endangering shot.

They are also taught to defend if attacked, and I would think that a fight that has both men on the ground would be viewed, in a police officer's mind, as a literal fight for his life.

And yet, the struggle seems to have ended... the officer is on the ground... rises with his weapon drawn... and fires four times, aiming at the victim's chest.

Could this incident have ended without gunfire? That is for the investigators to determine. But it's a tough argument when the result is the death of an unarmed man.

Officers are taught to take control of the situation. Drawing a weapon is usually sufficient, but there are times when matters require the weapon to be discharged. The use of deadly force, however, would not be warranted unless it was clear that the life of the peace officer or lives of others were in jeopardy.

Exactly. This "officer" should be facing murder charges.

Agree, where is the public outrage?

When will one of these officers be made an example of for everyone to see that murder is murder regardless whether you are wearing a uniform, badge or dog tags?

Did the officer identify himself as a police officer when he confronted the other man?

If some yahoo followed your car then got out and jumped you, would you believe him if he identified himself as an officer of the law? Would anyone?

You mean besides the whole wrestling with the cop bit?

That's no reason to pull a gun.

Have you never seen "Cops"? They will do anything possible to avoid pulling a gun (good officers). Pepper spray, taze, wrestle, arrest.

It "appears" that the victim stopped wrestling when he saw the officers badge. Regardless, the victim never had a weapon, so it's questionable that he was ever threatening the officers personal safety even during a wrestling scruff.

How about some questions like...

Why do you wait till someone is inside their apartment complex? Pull them over on the street.

It appears that the victim wasn't even in his car when the officer asked for the License, and it's not obvious that he identified himself (at least not according to witness statements).

That's police officer douchebagery right there. If was was speeding, ran a stop sign, and some plain clothed officer tried to stop me as I was walking to my apartment, or even already parked in the complex, I'd tell him to piss off.

I'm not even in a moving vehicle anymore (and if I'm already outside the vehicle, you really have no right to stop me at all). Don't you have another case to be working? Something that involves real crime?

If some yahoo followed your car then got out and jumped you, would you believe him if he identified himself as an officer of the law? Would anyone?

Being objective. The officer had his badge on his hip in public view.

However, it appears, he never flashed his lights (to indicate, hey, I'm a cop in an unmarked vehicle) and waited till they are in the apartment complex.

At that point, the cop has little right to ask for anything at all. They are no longer on a street, they're in an area of residence. If you haven't flashed your lights for them to pull over, you can't just walk up to someone for a traffic violation. Maybe that's just my opinion.

I'm not well enough versed, but it seems out of line. Like I said elsewhere. If a cop followed me in a real cop car into my apartment complex, waited till I parked. And asked to see my license for a moving violation, I'd tell him to go the f away. Let alone if I was walking up to my apartment outside of my vehicle.

My opinion is that this kind of guy deserved to be tasered, not shot. Where was the taser here? They use it so often after all it seems. Moreover, here in San Jose, apparently if cops "investigate" someone like Waldron or worse attacking a regular citizen, they don't help in filing charges. It's worse than a double standard! Someone gets needlessly killed!

My opinion is that this kind of guy deserved to be tasered,

So the next time you are out swimming and get into a disagreement with some1 which turns into a fight,, it's okay to TASER you??

Please........

SRD: I'll concede to your points. Nice post, by the way. That was one of the things I wondered, along with why four shots were fired: Why he came up with his gun drawn. If he felt - and we won't know unless we hear from him - that he needed to draw to gain situational control with a show of force, then ok. But four shots? If they're not going to shoot to kill, one to the leg would be sufficient to put the guy on the ground and not kill him. And, I'm still wondering how he ID'd himself besided a badge on his hip.

For those folks who were wondering "would you believe some yahoo....?" Yeah, I probably would, 'cause that's the way I was raised. Respect authority - police included. I would've, though, had one of the friends standing around (or in the car) call the station to find out if the guy was valid. That is just me...

Bernard:

For one, I don't have a record like that guy, and most people don't have problems like that. However, he was unarmed, so it doesn't to me a legitimate use of the lethal force. However, the cop could have used less-than-lethal it seems to me, especially under the circumstances. I'm not saying they should use tasers for not good reason like your emotional comment leads us to believe!

I agree, let's get the whole story. But the part that we do have is the cop shot and killed an UNARMED man. Unless the guy was Chuck Norris, I don't think a gun was needed.

Before you crucify the cop, let's get the whole story.

An off duty cop gets into a fight with an unarmed man and kills.. yes .. kills him.

There are NO scenarios to justify this pscho OFF DUTY cop taking the life of a man in a bathing suit. My imagination is not THAT wild....

No doubt the cops will later claim

You've got that right JW... I'm sure they will claim anything to get themselves off the hook.

All part of the shift we are undergoing to a so called 'Police State' where police are doing exactly what the 'troops' are doing in countries we invade------> whatever the F they want...

You are absolutely right, Macks. These stories are more frequent in the news. There had been a disproportionate number of brutality cases when the victim is non-white, but it now seems that the cops are trying to be equal opportunity abusers.

Funny, when a cop is killed in the line of duty, the mayor and chief of police always give speeches about what a fine officer he had been, what a fine citizen, father, husband etc. Why is it only the "good" cops get killed, and not the @!$%#s?

So you're arguing for handgun ownership, so when you're attacked by an off-duty police officer you'll at least have a fighting chance for survival?

Absolutely. However, it's pretty clear from this who attacked whom.

The cop was probably trying to be the hero of the day! So many cops think they can get away with this... this need to stop and what better place to stop it thaen right here right now!

I think the reptilian part of his brain took over because of all the excess adrenalin raging thru his body (fight or flight) along with his training made this a tragedy.

No, if you're the cop, and you're off-duty, you call your fellow officers who are on-duty to make the actual arrest, instead of acting like a jackass.

instead of acting like a jackass.

And you know this becasue you were there? Sorry I have family in law enforcement as far as I'm concerned cops 1 knuckleheads 0.

Sorry I have family in law enforcement

I'm sorry for you too, then. And for the rest of us if they share your attitude that shooting to death an unarmed man is in any way acceptable.

Wizeguy

Apparently you have a fascist PIG in your family. The idea that cops can do no wrong is what led to this and many other such stories. This is AMERICA bud, not some totalitarian country, and if you don't like it, leave.

cops 1 knuckleheads 0.

Just remember your own words when it happens to YOU...

Just remember your own words when it happens to YOU...

It always seems that way.

No one is converted until it happens to them. This applies to all things. Those who always have a job think the homeless are losers (until they lose their job and are struggling), those who have healthcare think those without are simply lazy (until their healthcare provider says guess what, your broken arm, it was a pre-existing condition, next!).

I'm always warry of anyone who is 100% certain of any enterprise. It means they are biased usually.

________

They said he was working offduty on a case...Does he not have a dashboard siren?

If so, why not flash your lights to identify yourself before the guy is out of the car in an apartment complex? That way, there's no question whether he thought you were a cop.

Difference in what way? From what I read, most people think the cops were wrong both times.