Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Police Shoot Unarmed 18-Year-Old Black Man in Brooklyn Twenty Times

Posted by Gabriel Thompson, RaceWire at 5:54 AM on November 15, 2007.


Gabriel Thompson: Unfortunately this is just one example of a disturbing national trend.
amdchoppin4
Coppin

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

This post, written by Gabriel Thompson, originally appeared on RaceWire

On the same day that ColorLines and The Chicago Reporter published a special joint investigation into fatal police shootings across the country, the New York Police Department shot to death an unarmed 18-year-old Black man in a public housing development in Bedford-Stuveysant, Brooklyn.

The mother of the deceased, Khiel Coppin, had called 911 and reported a domestic disturbance, and police reported that on the call they overheard a man saying he had a gun. When the NYPD arrived, Coppin climbed out of a first-floor window and was shot at twenty times by five officers. Thirteen bullets found their target, and after Coppin fell to the ground the police handcuffed him. The only object found on Coppin was a hairbrush, and he was pronounced dead at a local hospital.

An angry crowd immediately protested the shooting outside the development. The New York Times reported that one woman shouted a message to the police: "You need training--this is absurd!" Another outraged man told the cops: "I'm not trying to start a riot. I'm just saying it's not right."

The community's nearly instantaneous transformation from shock to anger can be best explained not just by the shooting of Coppin--details of which are still emerging--but also by the death of another unarmed Black man, Timothy Stansbury, in 2004. The 19-year-old Stansbury was climbing the stairs of the Louis Armstrong Development, three blocks from Coppin's apartment, when he met Officer Richard S. Neri Jr. Officer Neri was conducting a routine patrol of the complex with his gun drawn, loaded, and his finger on the trigger (despite the fact that he wasn't responding to a specific threat). When he met Stansbury he fired a fatal bullet through his chest. Neri was later acquitted by a grand jury, stating that he had been "startled."

Eyewitness accounts raise serious questions about the behavior of the police yesterday. As the Times reports: "Two bystanders who said they had seen the shooting said that Mr. Coppin was not armed, but was carrying a hairbrush when he climbed out the window and that he dropped it when the firing began. The two witnesses also said they both heard one officer yelling for the shooting to stop."

That doesn't sound good for the police, though the NYPD is clearly trying to control the narrative by offering a different story. As the Times continues: "According to the police, another witness described Mr. Coppin as concealing the hairbrush under his shirt, pointing it outward." This is nothing new, of course: when weapons don't appear, the police must offer a theory to explain the death of another unarmed victim.

Investigations are ongoing, so it is still too early to say what the results will be. But when an officer can kill an unarmed man like Stansbury and remain on the police force by citing a "startled" defense, one can only surmise that if the shooting was improper, the Coppin family will have a long road ahead in trying to hold the NYPD accountable.

Digg!

Tagged as: racism, police brutality, nypd, khiel coppin

Gabriel Thompson is a Brooklyn-based writer currently working on a book about Mexican immigrants.


Broken Glass
This is no doubt one of the ugliest periods in American political history.
Post by DCap. October 11, 2008.
Bipartisan Concern About the Dangers of McPalin’s Hate-Mongering
"I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate ..."
Post by Emptywheel. October 10, 2008.
Stock Market Drops 107 Points During Bush's Speech on the Economy
That's the kind of confidence Bush inspires these days.
Post by Amanda Terkel. October 10, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Police. Stop the militarisation and attitudes through better recruitment, less
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Nov 15, 2007 6:21 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
lethal arms, more civilian oversight, more punishment for crimes and attacks on cops, and allow use of physical force instead of device use (chokeholds, punches, etc.)

1) Police are not intended to be soldiers. Shooting at every 'threat'. They are peace officers. To protect and serve. We need to stop recruiting from the military/mercenary and have better training on role. Stop using all-black military uniforms.

2) police should carry .38 revolvers (or none at all). The modern guns have too much capacity and encourage firing too much. If an officer only has 6 or 5 shots he will be more careful with his shots, lest he gets outgunned. Also revolvers emphasis safety, usually have longer/stronger trigger pull, etc.

3) anybody who assaults police (or kills one) needs to be punished severely. We need to help eliminate the idea that the police are always under threat while on duty.

4) more review boards made up of retired cops, civilians, govt officials, and cross section of society. More "ride alongs" for civilians, board members, press, youths, etc. So people understand what a patrol is like.

5) more training on use of physical restraints (choke holds, take downs) and less reliance on guns, tasers, and dangerous weapons. More training on "talking down" and "deescalating" a suspect. Police should be in better physical shape. Being overweight, weak, or tired make it more likely to use mace, gun, taser on suspect.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's not the size of the gun! Posted by: rocketman
Almost...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Nov 15, 2007 6:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Almost as good as the group of officers patroling on an anti-gang task force whose defense in shooting a man an obscene number of times was..... they were scared.

Even being white, one of the reasons I will NEVER live in New York is because of the murderous, cowardly, craven, and utterly corrupt police force of that city.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Funny Thing
Posted by: QQOblivion on Nov 15, 2007 8:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Strange. The news article where I first read this story mentioned nothing about Khiel Coppin's race. But I knew instinctively that the police had to have shot an Afro-American or Hispanic man.
That is the MO of the NYPD, it seems.
Then when I read later that the cops had shot him 20 times, then, certainly, the dead man was Black (or Hispanic).
What a shock.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bizarro land
Posted by: Everitt on Nov 15, 2007 9:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No, don't you get it? The police had no choice because most of these young blacks are drug-dealing, hip hop-listening killers. They have a tough job and they make mistakes sometimes. People should stop being so mean to them.

And shooting an unarmed kid 20 times isn't racism - that's just the race-baiters talking who like to make a fast buck and enjoy complaining for no reason.

The real oppressed people in this country are people like Dog, Imus and Michael Richards, who are just minding their own business, expressing themselves and getting picked on. America is so unfair to us.

In case the subtlety is somehow lost, I'm just bringing out the apologists' points before they get a chance to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ummm, read a little bit more carefully Posted by: Thetorganization
NY isn't the only place this is happening
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Nov 15, 2007 9:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/14513595/detail.html

shoot first, ask questions later. but cover yer ass

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New York, not again
Posted by: Turkiye on Nov 15, 2007 9:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My most sincere and deepest sympathy at the loss of your son, Mr. and Mrs. Coppin.
I was disheartened when my oldest daughter, still my firstborn, moved to LALA Land. She lived a few blocks from Spanish Harlem, she is Cubana, odds are it may have happened to her, too. NYPD may have confused her screenplay for an ouzi. L.A., not my kind of city, east coast and such, now I'm thinking 'she's safer', damn I hope so. The loss of your child, it is too sad, so sad . I was worried for her when the Towers were hit, I suppose my concern should have been about ACTUAL things that happen to people that aren't acceptable due to melanin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is wrong with the analysis presented by albrechtkrausse?
Posted by: Enigma on Nov 15, 2007 11:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok, so it seems that he has at least a few detractors for other issues. Where is he wrong in what he said on this issue. Much of what he said makes sense. Even if you were able to make a test to weed out pyschos it would likely not do much good. You have to look at the organization. The police function like a gang in many cities, and thanks to our idiodic reaction to the drug problems we allowed the police to become more like the military in their operations and equipment. Guess what happened?? We got and continue to get more shootings. Why is it such a stretch to believe that a physically weak( read wimp ), overweight or chronically stupid person can become dangerous as a cop. Why chase a fast young kid when you can put one in his back? I can imagine some fat stupid cop doing that because I have met some of them. Or how about someone who is not good at fighting people. Do you think that person would be more or less likely to use deadly force, if that were the only viable option to them? Add to this the rise in "no knock" warrants, the patriot act and the general state of fear that americans live in and you have a formula for disaster.
There is a great difference between the police and the military. We blur that difference at our own peril.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The kid was suicidal
Posted by: Everitt on Nov 15, 2007 11:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Daily News is reporting that the kid had mental problems and was suicidal. According to the police he egged them on to shoot him, saying he had a gun.

I'm no racism denier and I know there have been instances of trigger-happy cops interpreting the color black as a bullseye, but maybe there was a rush to judgment on this one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The kid was suicidal Posted by: Enigma
» Advocating caution Posted by: Everitt
» RE: Advocating caution Posted by: Enigma
» RE: Advocating caution Posted by: zorro
Oops....
Posted by: Thetorganization on Nov 16, 2007 11:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now I see it. Consider yourself funny as hell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

albrechtkrausse still doesn't get it...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Nov 16, 2007 6:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... when you live in a police state things like this happen... what I want to know...
Are these symptoms of a sick and failing system?...


Again...
his comments on problems by trying to simplify it is backwards and insulting to victims of crime.

He's supporting the MSM's [which is just plain lazy and cheap news] attempt to dumb down the electorate yet again when what the electorate really needs, is to decide without interference with all the facts on the table...

What are the roots causes to these types of tradegies?
and what is the best course of action needed to correct it.

I don't need another simplified 2 minute MSM version for the made to order audience posted here.

Everything I've read emanating from this commenter is pretty insulting to any thinking person with half a brain... Beefing up the current police state with stiffer laws, applying gun control to peace officers but not on those that are intending to do harm in a gun crazy country, while at the same time beefing up judicial review boards and/or over-site committees is a symptom of something terribly wrong within the current bloated and corruptible system currently in place...

has the electorate been presented with HARM reduction techniques and have debates or discussions taken place on how to reduce the profitability of criminal organizations?

To me, everything seems to boil down to money, and that the "Government hindered" supply and demand economics is the main fuel source to much of these tragedies.

What happened to the land of the free?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Did anyone read the linked article?
Posted by: YogiBear on Nov 17, 2007 1:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's obvious that once again, that the headline writers didn't. It's also obvious the blogger didn't.

From the piece:

"Police said eight of the 20 bullets struck Coppin" Eight is not 13, nor is it 20. They shot at him 20 times, which is about 4 shots per officer.

Make any case you like about the use of deadly force by police, but for chrissakes, get your facts straight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

YOU GUYS ARE RANK BEGINNERS.
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Nov 18, 2007 10:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Oklahoma legislature wrote law that will allow a policeman to shoot "if he feels threatened". This is not actually much change in the law. They all carry a "throwdown piece". After they shoot someone they place the stolen, unidentifiable, gun in the hand of the victim and claim self defense. The state's attorney doesn't even bring charges. It is no longer against the law for a policeman to shoot anybody he wants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]