Skip to comments.Woman, 92, fatally shot as 3 Atlanta officers wounded
Posted on 11/21/2006 9:12:54 PM PST by Hazcat
92-year-old woman was killed after she shot three Atlanta narcotics officers Tuesday night when they broke down the front door of her home trying to serve a search warrant, police said.
One officer was hit in the arm, one was struck in the shoulder, and one was shot in the thigh. All were rushed to Grady Memorial Hospital, where they were in stable condition late Tuesday night. Police did not release their identities.
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
My guess is right name, wrong address.
Well theres one less crazy woman in the world so thats a good thing.
Congratulations, you posted the first of 3 threads!
Man, she went out, guns-a-blazin' at 92.
No-knock. The greatest thing since sliced bread.
Awwww Shucks, just lucky I guess.
Doughnut munchers trying to play Rambo. Most of us would have reacted the same way if someone broke down our front door...I know I would have.
It's sad, chalk up another victim in the War on Drugs.
She just winged them, they shoulda just winger back.
Uhh... I think that is part of being undercover.
Technically, the other two weren't duplicate, as they were AP versions with different text and diffferent headlines.
Three Atlanta narcotics officers were wounded in a Tuesday evening shootout with a 92-year-old woman in northwest Atlanta. She was shot and killed.
This was supposed to be the routine serving of a search warrant, but things went very wrong, very fast. Once the gunfire ended, three APD narcotics officers had been shot: one with a graze-wound to the face, and another hit dead-on, center of mass in the bulletproof vest. They were all transported to Grady Memorial Hospital with non-life threatening injuries.
A 92-year-old woman -- Catherine Johnson -- lived in the home where the officers tried to execute the warrant. She was killed in the gun battle.
The female victim shot and wounded all three of them (the officers), said deputy police chief Allen Dreher. The investigation is going to be ongoing -- Id say it would be all wrapped up in a period of time, but as we have it, she opened fire on the officers. The officers returned fire, struck and killed her.
Johnstons relatives arrived at the scene of the shootout, distraught and upset. The warrant was served at Johnsons home at 933 Neal Street. The victims family says they are convinced the police made a mistake and went to the wrong house.
They done the wrong house, said Johnsons niece, Sarah Dozier. And they killed her! This lady lived to be 92. She lived to be 92 and in good health. They went in there and she was scared to death.
According to family members, Johnson lived alone. Dozier says that Johnson did have a firearm. She says she took her aunt to get a permit for that firearm, for her own protection.
Tons of information is missing from the article. Did the police find any drugs? What evidence was presented to the judge to get the search warrant? How does a 92 year old woman, home alone, get the drop on 3 policemen who presumably have their guns drawn? Should future raids be conducted with more force to prevent dangerous 92 year old women from wounding officers with a rusty pistol?
What's the point of being undercover if they're going to break down a door (and do anything in which they need to be known as police)? It seems as though they deserve the blame, not only for breaking into the wrong house (which could be excusable), but for failing to make it clear that they were police officers, thereby making the shooting far more likely.
I know if some one broke down my door and just started yelling POLICE (I'll assume they did) they better duck!
Apostrophes are your friend.
Good questions. Some people here also shoot first and ask questions later.
If this happened the way I think it did then the cops should be charged with murder.
I bet a 92-year-old woman can hear the door being broken down a whole hellofalot better than a call of "police."
Why do you say that?
The "police" in plain cloths knocked her door down and came sworming in. She's in a high crime neighborhood and was afraid. So far, nothing in this reports indicates she is anything other than a victim.
Will be a very interesting story to read more about.
No. Future "raids" should be conducted after performing surveillance on the house, and if it's discovered the sole occupant is a 92-year old woman, they should be conducted by uniformed officers who knock on the door, smile, and say "Good afternoon, Ma'm! Mind if we take a look around?", instead of going in like f$%king SEAL Team Six.
I'd also like to know what kind of "narcotics" they thought were in there. This kind of sh!t isn't justified for a couple bags of pot.
Even if they yelled police she may not have understood. At 92 she probably has some hearing decline. Sometimes it takes a little longer to process what's going on too.
Seriously, do they really expect you to just sit there for anyone who can yell "police"? At least it's a little more difficult to find a police uniform if you're planning to illegitimately break into someone's house.
I don't think it is justified at all.
Is knocking on the door and announcing that you're police officers with a warrant also part of being undercover? Or do you think maybe at that point, the undercover stage might have been over?
Well, anyway, that's one less 92 year old lady terrorizing the neighbors! She won't go around sticking her stupid old lady door in the way of the narcs anymore.
Very true. No doubt a huge wrongful-death lawsuit is already in the works. It would seem that the police involved have an impossibly deep hole to climb out of.
lol@"going in like f$%king SEAL Team Six"
Agreed. But screaming police is not enough. Anyone can do that - including the neighborhood gangs she feared.
The police have a duty to properly identify themselves. There is no reason why they shouldn't be properly uniformed officers with badges when raiding a home.
A dozen centuries qualify as "a period of time."
I guess it depends on the agency. Some agencies require that a uniformed officer be present when undercover teams serves search warrants. Even then, mistakes happen.
"Tons of information is missing fromt he article."
It would be interesting to know if any person rented a room/garage space/storage space there at the house.
c'mon, we are not writing a novel here. Leave the Strunk and White at home.
D*mn. That's the best post of today.
One story said that she opened fire when the cops "approached the house."
Man, that was one trigger-happy b!tch if that is how it happened.
Here's an example:
"I knew it wasn't the cops because they don't bust through your door wearing ski masks," said Macek, 47.
One of the intruders ordered him to the kitchen floor, put a gun to Macek's head and demanded to know where the money and drugs were hidden.
Well, unless they subsequently broke down the door, even after being shot, it seems likely that she waited until they broke down the door to fire.
I'm on your side, FRiend. My last question was sarcastic. If there was ever a war that could be described as a "quagmire," the war on drugs is it.
It just seemed like a silly thing to report.
Yep, looks like Atlanta might be "under new ownership" ;).
And not a bad shot if she could hit three of them with a handgun before they could find cover.
Maybe not a bad shot...maybe just lucky.
My last day as a cop saw me pull off an amazing feat of marksmanship: after catching three rounds, one of them in the lung, I somehow managed to fire four shots from my revolver. One of them hit the perp in the right eye and blew his entire freakin' head open.
To see my shooting scores from the Army and the police range, you'd never believe I could do that.
I'd rather be lucky than good any day.
Sorry. I mistook your entirely appropriate mocking of redunant journalism as a defense of the police procedures in this operation, and responed with no-knock sarcasm!
Aye, that it is. The cure is becoming worse than the disease. However bad drugs are for society, government thuggery is worse.