By DEEPTI HAJELA, Associated Press Writer
17 minutes ago



NEW YORK - On the day his honeymoon was to have started, Sean Bell's memory and the manner of his death — shot, unarmed, by police — dominated the latest outcry against city officers' use of deadly force.

Several hundred people held a vigil for Bell on Sunday, some shouting "No justice, no peace!" and demanding the ouster of Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly. Many counted off to 50, the number of rounds estimated to have been fired by police at Bell, 23, and two other unarmed men in a car early Saturday, hours before he was to have married the mother of his two children.

The five officers were placed on paid administrative leave and stripped of their guns, said Paul Browne, chief spokesman for the NYPD. Police and prosecutors promised a full investigation, and Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Kelly planned to meet with community leaders at City Hall on Monday.

None of that stemmed the fury of a community outraged by the shootings.

"We cannot allow this to continue to happen," the Rev. Al Sharpton said at the gathering outside Mary Immaculate Hospital, where one of the two wounded men was in critical condition. "We've got to understand that all of us were in that car."

Relatives of the men attended the vigil and rally but none spoke publicly.

Kelly has said police shot at the car after it drove forward and struck an undercover officer and an unmarked police minivan. The information was based on interviews with witnesses and two officers who did not fire their weapons, he said.

However, Trini Wright, a dancer at the strip club where Bell's bachelor party was held, told the Daily News she was going to a diner with the men and was putting her makeup bag in the trunk of their car when the police minivan appeared.

"The minivan came around the corner and smashed into their car. And they (the police) jumped out shooting," Wright, 28, told the newspaper for Monday editions. "No 'stop.' No 'freeze.' No nothing."

Kelly had said Saturday it was too early to say whether the shooting was justified. He said it was unclear whether the officers, who were in plain clothes, identified themselves before firing.

Bell's fiancee, Nicole Paultre, made a quiet visit to the site of his shootings before dawn Monday, lighting candles clustered around a photograph of the smiling couple with one of their daughters.

The shootings occurred after 4 a.m. Saturday outside the Kalua Cabaret in Queens. Kelly said the confrontation stemmed from an undercover operation by seven officers investigating the club.

Bell was struck twice. Joseph Guzman, 31, was shot at least 11 times, and Trent Benefield, 23, was hit three times. Guzman was in critical condition Monday and Benefield was stable.

The officers' shots struck the men's car 21 times. They also hit nearby homes and shattered windows at a train station, though no residents were injured.

Police thought one of the men in the car might have had a gun, but investigators found no weapons. It was unclear what prompted police to open fire, Kelly said.

According to Kelly, the groom was involved in a verbal dispute outside the club, and one of his friends referred to a gun.

An undercover officer walked closely behind Bell and his friends as they headed for their car. As he walked toward the front of the vehicle, the car drove forward, striking the officer and minivan, Kelly said.

That officer was apparently the first to open fire, Kelly said. He had served on the force for five years. One 12-year veteran fired his weapon 31 times, emptying two full magazines, Kelly said.

It was the first time any of the officers, all of whom carried 9 mm handguns, had been involved in a shooting, he said.

At some point, Bell backed the car onto a sidewalk, hitting a building gate, police said. He then drove forward, striking the police vehicle a second time, Kelly said.

The department's policy prohibits shooting at moving vehicles states "unless deadly force is being used against the police officers or another person present, by means other than a moving vehicle."

This isn't the first time the NYPD has come under scrutiny over officer-involved shootings.

In 1999, police killed Amadou Diallo, an unarmed immigrant from Guinea in western Africa who was shot 19 times. The four officers in that case were acquitted of criminal charges. And in 2003, Ousmane Zongo, a native of Burkina Faso in western Africa, was hit four times, twice in the back. In that case, one officer was convicted of criminally negligent homicide, but acquitted of the more serious charge of second-degree manslaughter.

50 rounds and only one dead? Amateurs.

So at this point you have an altercation outside a strip club at 4am with a stripper witness contradicting police witness accounts...only sure thing is that NY needs better firearms training. 50+ shots and they sprayed surrounding homes & a train station?! Jeebus...

Al Sharpton had Jennifer Aniston hair before Jennifer Aniston had Jennifer Aniston hair.

edit: not the only one concerned with poor marksmanship then, am I?

they were showing restraint

The NY Times was speculating that it was a case of 'contagious shooting' by the cops (think: Amidou Diallo), where shooting by one begets fear/excitement/shooting by another.

That Times piece provided a more-complete account of the incident than the story above. Essentially, the problem began in the club (which apparently is well-known to the authorities in Jamaica, Queens for being the frequent site of drug trafficking, prostitution, etc.), where one of the members of the bachelor party insinuated that he was carrying a gun. This was overheard by an uncover NY cop who was in the establishment. It gets a bit confusing from there. The Times piece indicated that the party (consisting of eight men) left the club shortly thereafter. In the process, they allegedly got into some kind of altercation with another individual, who was not a cop. At that point, one member of the party said something to the effect of 'yo, I'm going to get my gun'. The narc had apparently followed them out of the club and witnessed this. As such, he identified himself as a cop, presumably drew his weapon, and told them to halt, etc. With that, the party broke in half, with four guys running to one car and the other four running to another vehicle. The narc chased four to a Nissan. When the narc got to the car, the dead dude--who was driving--allegedly rammed into his leg. The narc opened fire at least once at this point.

By then, a van apparently filled with additional undercover NY cops (presumably doing surveillance) had pulled up in an attempt to block in the Nissan. The Nissan rammed the van, then backed-up over a curb and into a storefront, before surging forward and ramming the van again. At that point, the cops in the van spilled out and unloaded on the occupants. The driver was popped three times. The most-critically injured survivor was hit eleven times.

It sounds like a tragic misunderstanding. But, again, the Times piece is presumably based on the cops' account. Two sides to the story.

Obviously there's a whole lot more to this story than may be known at this point, but I gotta say I can't fault the guy for ramming the unmarked van. I mean, I'd be pretty effin' freaked out if some random, creepy looking van tried to box me in somewhere. I don't think I'd ram it, but that's more because my little car wouldn't do shit to it.

^^Yeah these dudes weren't dressed as cops, apparently.

Also, The department's policy prohibits shooting at moving vehicles states "unless deadly force is being used against the police officers or another person present, by means other than a moving vehicle."

In hunting this is called "Buck Fever." This adds another layer of irony since the victims were Black men.

And the police won't call them "unarmed" as long as they were in a moving vehicle, they'll call it "responding to a vehicular assault threat" and get off with a slap on the wrist.


They'll say the vehicle was boxed in and so isn't considered "moving," which would contradict their claims of protecting themselves against the threat of a moving vehicle. This claim will still work 'cause this is going to be an internal Police investigation and not a trial.

Bloomberg just came out criticizing the officers, essentially asking (rhetorically) how it was possible to squeeze off 50+ shots in such a situation. This followed a meeting with Sharpton, et al.

Here's one of the bigger questions the officers will have to answer: How is it possible that, as the NY Times has reported, "One 12-year veteran fired his weapon 31 times, emptying two full magazines"? That is, if this was a split-second, moment-of-passion/confusion incident, how do you manage to empty your mag and reload to the tune of 31 shots fired. That does NOT add up.

But it's pretty inevitable that there will be one, right?

two clips? How can this guy really claim it was in self defense or that he was threatened, if he can reload without a single shot coming from them.



'contagious shooting'?

What is this? The Blues Brothers?






Also, there was a 92 year old woman in Atlanta who was shot to death by cops when they busted into her home a few days ago.

If memory serves she shot at & hit two cops before they killed her, though.

No, probably not. My guess: suspended w/o pay, and then back on the force.

I don't know if that is true or not, but if some guys come busting into her house, I think she is justified in shooting.

If several strange figures came smashing into your home, and you had a gun nearby, what would you do?



I guess these kinds of things are necessary to keep people from using unaproved drugs, as opposed to drugs that the federal government subsidizes.

I'd be lying if I said I had any clue what you're talking about.

I thought she hit all three, none fatally?

Yep. It's a sad, sad story, but I can't help but think this is the coolest way for a 92-year-old grandma to go down.