San Diego, California – It seems like these days even when police officers engage in a shooting of a suspect that is seemingly justified, there’s going to be a protest happening.
Much like the protest that filled the streets after San Diego Police officers shot an armed suspect who allegedly pointed a gun at them.
Protesters gather in support of armed criminal shot by police.https://t.co/c2Yt6RaYFk
— The Don (@DeporableDon) June 29, 2020
The encounter between police and 25-year-old Leonardo Hurtado Ibarra was said to have taken place on June 27th at around 6:00 p.m., according to officials.
Officers were patrolling the area when they were said to have recognized the suspect from a flyer saying that Ibarra was wanted in connection with an armed robbery case.
According to San Diego Police Captain Rich Freedman, when the officers attempted to engage the suspect, Ibarra allegedly produced a handgun and pointed it at the officers. The two officers advised the suspect to “stop,” and then critically wounded Ibarra with gunfire.
Seeing that every police shooting is being scrutinized, demonstrators began protesting in the streets of San Diego, demanding that police reveal any body cam footage from the encounter – which the SDPD did release surveillance and body cam footage on June 28th that substantiated the version of events presented by the department earlier.
In the video footage, two officers can be seen approaching Ibarra, who then begins to walk away from the officers. In Ibarra’s hand there was a bag, which he then reportedly dropped, and then pulled a weapon from his waistband and pointed it at the officers.
After officers fired at the suspect, the video reportedly showed them trying to revive the suspect. The suspect is said to still be in the intensive care unit after the confrontation with police.
You can view the surveillance and body cam footage below:
Photos were also released by the department following the shooting, that showed a close-up picture of the gun said to have been the one pointed at officers during the incident. The image shows what looks to be a handgun that was wrapped in a camouflage-patterned cloth.
Both of the officers involved in the shooting were said to have been placed on administrative leave during the investigation of the incident, with both the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office monitoring the investigation being handled by the SDPD.
While police were able to release body cam footage in the case involving Ibarra’s shooting, that is not the case with 18-year-old Andres Guardado who was shot by sheriff’s deputies in Compton earlier this month.
However, police did say that Guardado happened to have a highly illegal weapon in his possession when confronted by deputies.
Here we go again. Cops roll by and see a kid brandishing a handgun. He runs and they chase. Nothing identifying him as a security guard. Turns out he had an illegal gun and wasn't certified to do security. Twitter mob: murder!!! https://t.co/20Ex2iNHO1
— knglerxst (@knglerxst) June 21, 2020
A protest reportedly formed outside of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department’s office located in Compton on June 21st in response to the shooting of Guardado who many have claimed he was shot in the back by deputies.
Except, those claims are only coming from family members of the deceased, and the investigation hasn’t prompted anything to suggest he was shot in the back.
As of now, the autopsy is actually still pending. But that still hasn’t stopped the likes of the usual suspects like Nanette Diaz Barragan and Maxine Waters clamoring about police targeting black youths. In a joint statement by Waters and Barragan, the following was noted:
“Another day, and another Black or brown kid has been shot in the back by police.”
The statement continued to perpetuate that Guardado was shot in the back, once again with it being unconfirmed:
“Andres Guardado is the latest young man of color killed by police gunfire. He was shot in the back. The officers involved did not wear body cameras.”
Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva responded to the criticism regarding the lack of body cameras, explaining that the sheriff’s department has been vehemently requesting since December of 2018, which the county’s Board of Supervisors have been allegedly delaying.
The current narrative being presented by those outraged at the incident is that Guardado was working security for a local business when deputies engaged him and subsequently shot him after a pursuit.
However, that presented narrative is heavily divorced from the nuance that is needed to understand the totality of the circumstances.
#protest against the LACO Sheriff’s Department after deputy shot and killed 18 Year Old Andres Guardado in #Gardena Sheriff says Guardado produced an illegal lethal weapon, a hand gun with no serial numbers. Victim’s cousin told me he never owned a gun pic.twitter.com/1e129BpSnw
— Paul Vercammen (@pvercammencnn) June 22, 2020
There’s currently not much denying that Guardado was employed as a security guard to a local business; however, homicide Captain Kent Wegener said the following about the interaction:
“Guardado reportedly looked toward the deputies, produced a handgun and ran southbound down the driveway of the business.”
Which the deputies pursued and some sort of exchange led to a deputy firing six shots at Guardado upper body, according to the LASD.
Turns out that the handgun produced wasn’t a legally registered weapon. According to reports, it was a .40-caliber semi-automatic pistol without a serial number. On top of the unregistered, untraceable gun; it also happened to host an illegal 15-round magazine that was fully loaded.
Not to mention – Guardado was only 18-years-old. In order to be an armed security guard in California, you need to at least be 21-years-old. Furthermore, police had no idea that he was operating as a security guard, as he was noted as not wearing any identifiable clothing to signify him functioning as such.
Well, to be fair, everyone has a "clean record" until they don't – myself included. Believe it or not, people with clean records commit crimes and then eventually create records. That's kind of how it works.
— Greg Hoyt (@GregHoytLET) June 22, 2020
As if that weren’t enough to get a clear picture at the nuance conveniently left out of the clamoring by the outrage mob, there’s also zero record of Guardado having a guard card within the state of California. There was also no gun belt or holster found on Guardado’s person after the shooting.
So, for the sake of simplifying the alleged scenario:
-The suspect brandished a weapon at deputies
-Proceeded to run from deputies attempting to make contact
-A confrontation ensued in an alleyway
-The suspect was carrying an unregistered gun
-The gun carried had the serial number removed
-There was an illegal magazine that was fully loaded
-The suspect was not legally old enough to be an armed security guard
-There’s no record of Guardado even having a guard card in California
Yet, even with all the aforementioned information detailed, Barragan and Waters are literally claiming that we must seek “justice for Andres Guardado”.
While there’s absolutely zero wrong with investigating a shooting, it’s clear that those among the progressive left feel like the deputies are already guilty.
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.
Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!