Unarmed Man shot by Amtrak Police

Sad story...

https://www.google.com/amp/chicago.suntimes.com/news/man-shot-by-amtrak-police-outside-union-station-paralyzed/amp/?client=safari

Interesting. Cops have not been allowed to shoot people for fleeing since 1985.

Another source adds, "Robertson has no criminal record and was unarmed when he was shot, though he was carrying "an insignificant amount" of marijuana, Hopson said."

So, it seems he ran because he had a small amount of MJ and is paralyzed as a result. Sad. They cops would probably have just told him he was bad for having it and let him go.

Sounds like a justified shoot to me. Maybe this is a good sign Chicago PD is trying to take back their city.

I spent 35 years in law enforcement, definitely not a good shooting. You can't shoot someone for running g away unless they pose a significant threat to the public and are likely to harm kill someone unless they are stopped immediately. Amtrak will pay on this one.

An interesting part of this story is that the shooting victim and his brother had arrived on MegaBus from Memphis and were waiting to transfer to a MegaBus to Minneapolis. Since MegaBus just drops people off on Canal Street south of Union Station, the bus driver suggested they wait at Union Station for their next bus. Amtrak has taken the position that MegaBus passengers are not welcome at Union Station since MegaBus refuses to pay any money to Amtrak for their passengers to use Union Station as a waiting room. The two men were chased out of the station by Amtrak Police. For some reason Amtrak police thought they were involved in a holdup at or near the station and chased them, resulting in the shooting. The whole thing would probably never have happened if MegaBus actually used a terminal, either Union Station or the nearby Greyhound station, rather than cheaping out with street loading. I certainly hope MegaBus is included in the lawsuit that is sure to follow this incident.

I'm going to let the legal system sort this one out, although I do believe that Amtrak will probably end up paying a big civil settlement for this.

I can't speak to the legitimacy of the shooting (if they thought him involved in a holdup, would this be valid reason to believe he was armed?), but he sort of brought this on himself. He ran and didn't stop when ordered to do so. The amount of a drug probably affects what he may be charged with, but he shouldn't have had any on his person.

They were Amtrak PD, it has nothing to do with Chicago PD.

MikefromCrete said:

An interesting part of this story is that the shooting victim and his brother had arrived on MegaBus from Memphis and were waiting to transfer to a MegaBus to Minneapolis. Since MegaBus just drops people off on Canal Street south of Union Station, the bus driver suggested they wait at Union Station for their next bus. Amtrak has taken the position that MegaBus passengers are not welcome at Union Station since MegaBus refuses to pay any money to Amtrak for their passengers to use Union Station as a waiting room. The two men were chased out of the station by Amtrak Police. For some reason Amtrak police thought they were involved in a holdup at or near the station and chased them, resulting in the shooting. The whole thing would probably never have happened if MegaBus actually used a terminal, either Union Station or the nearby Greyhound station, rather than cheaping out with street loading. I certainly hope MegaBus is included in the lawsuit that is sure to follow this incident.

Click to expand...

Megabus has relocated their stop even farther from Union Station - it's on Polk between Clinton and Canal, so 4-5 blocks away rather than 1 block as it had been. It's particularly interesting that the Megabus driver specifically said that the Megabus passengers could not wait in the Greyhound station but could wait at Union Station. I'd like to see Chicago force Megabus to use an off-street terminal and provide some sort of waiting area for its passengers - whether that means Megabus pays Greyhound for access to their station or pays Amtrak or CTA for access to another space or whatnot.

Well whether this particular shooting was justified or not, it doesn't change the fact that "unarmed" doesn't mean "not dangerous". The media likes to use the word "unarmed" to imply that ANY time a suspect doesn't brandish a defined weapon, that the police would be automatically unjustified in shooting him/her.

Let's all remember the following as this plays out.

Bad things can happen that are not always criminal offenses.

Different states have different laws regarding shooting at fleeing suspects.

Different police agencies have different policies regarding the same, and may have a stricter standard than the law. (you can get fired for something that may be legal if is clearly against the rules of your dept) This has been an ongoing saga in NY where an officer is alleged to have used a choke hold resulting in the death of a suspect. Not illegal under NYS law, but not permitted under the NYPD patrol guide.

THe latest update is that Amtrak is saying that they did not remove them from the station until passengers were complaining that they were doing drugs in the station.

Kinda curious where they are going with that.

The only justifiable application of deadly force is when an officers life has been threatened by an assailant with a weapon and/or his life is in danger. I do not know what happened at CUS as I was not there, but this incident appears to be an unjustifiable use of deadly force.

Typically cops would say, when shooting an unarmed person in the back :

"We feared for our life."

Well, OK then.

I have a less then pleasant Amtrak police story as well not nearly as bad but still not enjoyable.

I was sitting in a public parking next door to the REA building in Washington DC on a concrete riser watching trains and reading a book between trains (I didn't get much reading done so many trains) as I was destressing from relationship issues. And as I was sitting there peacefully I was yanked from behind my back and told to keep my hands where they could see them. And that was a two foot fall from where I was sitting. And then they made me bend over frisked me. Searched my camera bag without asking. They pulled my wallet out of my pocket and couldn't find my ID till I'm like let me do it. And they proceeded to question me like I was a terrorist. And they couldn't understand why I was watching trains. So I'm not surprised that this has happened.

In some states NY included, an officer has legal justification to use deadly physical force to prevent physical harm to others or against a person fleeing arrest for certain very serious crimes. It is covered under art 35 of NYS PL "justification" Again, legality does not imply that it is acceptable under the policies of a particular PD.

OlympianHiawatha said:

Sounds like a justified shoot to me. Maybe this is a good sign Chicago PD is trying to take back their city.

Click to expand...

Please understand that not everyone has been as well treated by the police as you and I have, and that some people, particularly black men, have an entirely reasonable and justified fear of police mistreatment. Please try to have a little bit of compassion for a man who may or may not have been committing a minor violation of the law, but whatever he did does not deserve to live the rest of his life paralyzed as a result.

This is why we say that Black Lives Matter: because to so many, clearly they don't.

MikefromCrete said:

Amtrak has taken the position that MegaBus passengers are not welcome at Union Station since MegaBus refuses to pay any money to Amtrak for their passengers to use Union Station as a waiting room.

Click to expand...

Eric S said:

It's particularly interesting that the Megabus driver specifically said that the Megabus passengers could not wait in the Greyhound station but could wait at Union Station.

Click to expand...

Megabus passengers are not only unwelcome, but even worse, I would hope that Megabus passengers selling illegal drugs while waiting inside Union Station should not be tolerated by Amtrak. I hope that Amtrak pulls Megabus into this lawsuit mess.

This mega bus and bolt bus mess needs fixing. taking others money to put in their pockets needs stopping..

I don't see how MegaBus can be held accountable for the criminal behavior, though. That's like holding a cab driver accountable if they give someone a ride to the drug store and then that person robs the drug store. It's not like MegaBus knew that passenger's intentions. Yes, MegaBus is super shady for putting their bus stops near other transit agencies' waiting areas, but that has nothing to do with this.

Also, to address MikeFromCrete's post: I'm not sure how Amtrak enforces Union Station access. I've never been asked to show my ticket when I'm in the common areas of Union Station. I've often spent time in the Great Hall and food court while waiting for friends. Besides that, Amtrak is not the only agency that uses Union Station. Metra riders use the station too. So I wouldn't say Amtrak forbids MegaBus passengers so much as Amtrak requires you show your ticket to enter Amtrak-specific waiting areas. (And, to that end, I've only been asked to show my ticket once when entering the cattle pen.)

Based on the information provided here, it would seem there was no justification to shoot this man.

But everyone should always adhere to the rule I was taught and follow. If a police officer tells you to do something, you do it. Running, back talking, etc will usually result in a bad outcome.

If an arrest is unjustified, you and an attorney will work it out.

Railroad Bill said:

Based on the information provided here, it would seem there was no justification to shoot this man.

But everyone should always adhere to the rule I was taught and follow. If a police officer tells you to do something, you do it. Running, back talking, etc will usually result in a bad outcome.

If an arrest is unjustified, you and an attorney will work it out.

Click to expand...

^^This^^

That said, there is no way by any reasonable stretch of the imagination that failure to do so should mean an on-the-spot death sentence.

I'm pretty sure he's going to sue, and unless there's something that comes up that's not being reported they will likely settle.

I'm not sure if this will be the liability of Amtrak or the officer. I remember a case where a National Park Service law enforcement ranger fired a Taser at someone walking away and clearly not being combative. The victim sued and got $50,000 at trial. It wasn't reported who was supposed to pay. I've heard that there has been precedent that a law enforcement agency with qualified immunity may not mean the officer has that immunity in the case of a violation of someone's Constitutional rights.