April 16, 2004

With its decision to suspend Denver Officer James Turney for 10 months without pay and then to keep him off the streets after he returns, the Hickenlooper administration has sent a strong, controversial - but correct - message to every officer on the force: Your responsibility in containing a potentially violent domestic situation is to go the extra mile. And if that means pulling back from a doorstep, closing a security door and consulting with other officers before ordering a man inside with a knife to drop it and turn himself in, then that's what you do.

"By immediately forcing a confrontation with Mr. Childs," Manager of Safety Al LaCabe said, "Officer Turney exposed himself and others to an immediate risk of harm, placing Mr. Childs only six to seven feet away from Officer Turney, and creating a likely deadly force situation."

Advertisement

Actually, Turney forced a possible confrontation, since he had no way of knowing Childs wouldn't drop his knife when he was called upon to come out. But LaCabe's underlying point is sound: Containment sometimes means pulling back, even when that conflicts with an officer's instinct to press on.

Officers know this already from their training, LaCabe insists, or he wouldn't be punishing Turney with a suspension. But until Thursday, police hadn't expected such a suspension for a tactical mistake that precedes what then becomes the justifiable use of force. What LaCabe has done, with the full support of Mayor John Hickenlooper, is signal that from now on a questionable choice of tactics could prompt disciplinary action when the result is someone's death.

LaCabe was right to focus his criticism on Turney's decisions before Childs emerged from behind the main door with a knife and moved toward the officer. As we wrote six months ago, many officers would have responded just as Turney did and fired their weapon once confronted with a young man with a knife. LaCabe agreed, saying he'd stood where Turney had been when he shot his gun and concluded that "a reasonable officer knowing what Turney knew, not what we know now," could easily have believed he was in danger. In other words, there was justification at that point for the use of deadly force.

We're sure LaCabe's decision won't please those who believe Turney should be fired. While we sympathize with their anger, we just don't see how Denver could fire an officer after a shooting unless a large majority of his colleagues would have held their fire in identical circumstances.

Ironically, we believe Turney deserved severe punishment - perhaps even firing - for something we weren't even aware of until Thursday. On July 4 of last year, the day before the shooting, he spent 147 minutes making private phone calls on a personal cell phone while supposedly working his shift. One of those calls was the already notorious one in which he allegedly threatened his former mother-in-law.

Any officer who spends nearly 2 ½ hours in a single day gabbing on the phone while he's supposed to be working is defrauding the public. How many times did Turney shortchange the public in this way before July 4? LaCabe doesn't know, but surely it's time to find out.

We hope the Civil Service board upholds LaCabe's decision, which admittedly is based upon his interpretation of a vague regulation demanding that an officer maintain "the highest standard of efficiency and safety." If a new administration wants to press its police to adhere to the best tactical practices -and to punish officers who don't when their decisions are partly responsible for a civilian's death - it ought to be free to do so. If this administration discovers it doesn't have that freedom, then it should take its case to voters and change the city charter.

Copyright 2004, Rocky Mountain News. All Rights Reserved.