On December 15th, Shreveport Police Cpl. Bryan Lauzon was working private security at the Fair Park Terrace Apartments. When he spotted 44 year old Michael Gilyard riding his bicycle on the sidewalk coming from an area of the apartments where there had been complaints of drug activity, Lauzon stopped him and questioned him.
You can watch the dashcam video of the stop here.
After some initial conversation, Gilyard consented to being patted down. When Cpl. Lauzon found a pistol concealed on Gilyard, he was attacked and Gilyard attempted to get possession of Lauzon’s service weapon. Lauzon warned Gilyard that he would shoot him, but Gilyard persisted. Lauzon shot him. Gilyard was pronounced dead at the hospital.
After an extensive investigation, DA Charles Scott announced this week that Lauzon was within his rights to use deadly force.
In the Times article, Scott is quoted as saying "All the evidence clearly shows no wrongdoing in the actions of Officer Lauzon, either during the initial stop of Michael Gilyard or the subsequent altercation which resulted in the shooting."
"Investigators found 16.8 grams of marijuana, 3.8 grams of crack cocaine packaged for individual sale, over $5,000 in cash and a .45-caliber handgun in Gilyard's clothing. A criminal conviction for the possession of the firearm alone would have resulted in a minimum of 10 years in prison for Gilyard."
Enter the NAACP. They are asking for a review of the case by the Louisiana Attorney General and the U. S. Justice Department. While DA Scott says he welcomes the review, I don’t understand their reasoning; I suppose they believe that Lauzon should have submitted and allowed Gilyard to shoot him.
It is a terrible thing when something like this happens, but in the words of DA Scott "When you attack a fully armed officer, it probably won't end well".
A Facebook page has been set up to show support for Cpl. Lauzon. If you are on Facebook, be sure to go the the page and click the ‘like’ button.
Support Shreveport Police Cpl. Bryan Lauzon
Friday, January 27, 2012
43 comments:
Rules of the road:
1. No personal attacks or insults.
2. No accustory statements about wrongdoing or criminal acts against anyone.
3. Say all you want about the pros and cons concerning the candidates and the issues, or the general subject of the blog post, just follow Rule #1 and Rule #2.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the DA is confident in his assessment and that a second assessment would only strengthen his decision. I would hope that the NAACP would have enough class to make a statement affirming the decision and supporting this officer when the review is over.
ReplyDeleteThis is crazy, the officer did what he had to do.
ReplyDeleteAny time there is a shooting involving a white officer and a black suspect, the NAACP will become involved. It matters not to them if the suspect is wrong or not. In this case the officer did what he had to do to save his own life. If the NAACP wants to help blacks maybe they could encourage them to go to school, graduate, and get a job. I would not be surprised if the Rev Jackson and Sharpton make an apperance.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what lawyer the family has lined up. You know they're going to sue, they want a check.
ReplyDeleteinteresting how now, for appearance only I'm sure, the momma is at lsuhsc for heart problems... just happens to all happen the same day of the naacp meeting. hmm... momma still wants that money. i'd be interested to know how many times she called police dept for her baby's money.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the problem with further investigation? It seems to be a case of justified homicide, but if people are complaining about it being investigated, then maybe there is something hidden. Those who forget history are destined to repeat it. The dog returns to its vomit, the sow returns to the wallow, and the NAACP must be ever vigilant to see that we don't turn back to days when people were lynched if they did not look down in shame in the presence of whites.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I have no problem at all with further investigation, even though the facts are pretty clear from the video. I'm sure that if the Feds and the State AG verify the findings, you will be back to thank them for their efforts.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe most people want to go back to the days when blacks had to look down when meeting a white person. If that is what the NAACP is worried about, they can disband. Very few fools believe blacks should be mistreated. Most people think they should not be given preferential treatment because of something that happened hundreds of years ago. They should be treated as equals and given every opportunity to excel.
ReplyDeleteIf a person, regardless of color, attacks a police officer they deserve what they get.
Bottom line is if you play with poo poo then you will get poo poo all over you. The cop did what he had to do. The guy who got shot should not have been doing what he was doing. The NAACP is doing what it does best and that is losing even more credibility and promoting more crime in the black community. Everybody knows you don't fight cops unless you want to die. That bad guy will not be missed and he should not have been playing with poo poo!
ReplyDeleteMy Grandfather was a policeman in the 1940's. While walking his beat at night he heard the sound of broken glass. Investigating the sound , he was attacked by a black male with a 2x4. The man broke his shoulder. He shot and killed the man, rather than being beat to death. His shoulder had to be wired back together. A different world back then. Open and shut case of self defense. No different than today. What has changed?
ReplyDeleteAlex
Alex, What has changed? Let's me spell it out for you. L-I-B-E-R-A-L-I-S-M!
ReplyDeleteWhat has changed since the days of prohibition, when the criminals were selling alcohol, and being shaken down by the police for a significant share of the loot? Alcohol is now legal, and it is all sorts of other drugs which the criminals are selling. The police have not changed any either. Human nature is still human nature.
ReplyDelete10:53, I can't put this any plainer, you are an f'ing idiot!
ReplyDeleteWhat Anon at 9:20 and 6:46 said.
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, 6:46, you are just a paragon of enlightenment.
ReplyDeleteAnon @ 9:00, Yes I am. I saw your stupidity and enlightened others by pointimg it out. At what point in this video did yopu hear Officer Lauzon shake down Gilyard? If I heard correctly he gave Gilyard back his money and told him to secure it and something about how hard times are. Only a moron would think otherwise.
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't the NAACP ever show up and raise a commotion when a black officer is involved in a shooting. If the Cpl hadbeen black it would be done and overwith with the DA's ruling. Shreveport needs to wise up and tell the NAACP to leave legal matters alone and concentrate on civil problems or just go away all together
ReplyDelete7:38, I respectfully disagree with you. It has been said earlier by someone else (Jan27 @ 6:18) to let the NAACP make frivolous charges, they lose more credibility with each one they pursue. Trust me, they step in it just about every time and this will just be on one more.
ReplyDeleteThe organization has long out lived its usefulness. To them there's a white racist behind every tree. If they really want to see racism, they need only to look in the mirror.
I don't know about them, but everyday I have to worry about taking care of my family which leaves no time or me to figure out how I'm going to keep the black man down.
Yes, they are uppity nowadays, no doubt about it.
ReplyDeleteThe most important thing is to get that one out of the white house. But if we are ever going to take back our country, we have to get our white birthrate back up. The percentage of white non-mexican in Texas is now just 45%, and it ain't getting anything but worse.
ReplyDeleteIf the NAACP wants an additional investigation let them pay for it.
ReplyDeleteThis was an illegal stop and Gilyard had a right to resist. There are no facts that show any reason the officer should have stopped Gilyard, unless bike riding is now a crime. Maybe Iran and China are training the police.
ReplyDelete12:53,
ReplyDeleteHe was on private property. The officer was working an extra job. He was leaving a known drug location. The officer wasnt trying to arrest him, he was trying to pat him down for weapons when the suspect went for his gun. Dumbass liberal
@12:53, there isn't a right to resist an illegal stop.
ReplyDeleteGenerally, individuals in Louisiana have the right to resist an unlawful detention, including unconstitutional Terry stops and searches. See State v. Manuel, 06–0486 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/21/06), State v. Jerrold J. Francis.State v. Jerrold Francis., 60 So.3d 703 (La. App., 2011)
ReplyDelete3:12,
ReplyDeleteDoes the suspect have a right to go for a gun or go for the officers' gun? I'm waiting to hear your dumbass liberal response.
12:53 PM "There are no facts that show any reason the officer should have stopped Gilyard, unless bike riding is now a crime."
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't an illegal stop. Shreveport has an ordinance against anyone over the age of 15 riding a bicycle on a sidewalk. That gave him probable cause.
Jim, I'm half deaf and I heard on the video Lauzon tell Gilyard why he stopped him, and it was over the bicycle ordinance. I guess some people are more deaf by choice.
ReplyDelete@3:12, Louisiana recognizes a right to reasonably resist an illegal arrest. There is no right to resist an illegal stop or frisk.
ReplyDelete7:16 - that's what I was thinking.
ReplyDeleteLa. R.S. 14:108 was amended by Act 132, Acts 2006 to add "lawful detention" to paragraph A and to paragraph B(1)(c). Prior to the 2006 amendment, the statute did not include resisting "detention" as part of the offense. Arguably, by adding lawful detention to the resisting arrest statute, a person now has the right to "resist" an unlawful detention just as he can an illegal arrest; if he can be charged for resisting lawful detention the inference is that he may resist unlawful detention.
ReplyDeleteWell, it is just common sense that if the police had been doing their jobs, it would be on-duty police with warrants who would have arrested the drug dealer for selling dope. For an off-duty officer moonlighting on private security to be stopping the dope dealer, ostensibly for riding his bicycle on the sidewalk, and end up shooting him in the back, it is just suspicious as all get out, and it needs to be investigated as completely and exhaustively as humanly possible.
ReplyDeleteDid you watch the video? Are you just anti-cop or pro-drug dealer? It was a legitimate stop. The thug was carrying a gun, dope, and a large amount of cash. He attacked the officer.
ReplyDeleteI am neither anti-cop, nor pro-drug dealer. I do, however, support and defend the Constitution of These United States, including the Bill of Rights. I am just as happy as I possibly can be, for legitimate on-duty police officers to serve arrest warrants and lock up drug dealers. People who have been served with no search warrant, much less any arrest warrant being shot in the back is not my idea of good law enforcement.
ReplyDeleteHe gave permission to be searched, no warrant was needed. He lied to the officer about having a weapon. The Bill of Rights was fully satisfied. As to the shooting, hard to know exactly what happened. At one point he was on the officer's back and he was warned repeatedly. As the DA said, if you attack a fully armed officer it is not likely to turn out well.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that this officer went to work thinking 'I'll just shoot somebody tonight?'
Come on.
I don't think any such thing, and my only desire is for the truth to be fully known, whatever the truth might be. I certainly think that it should be learned if the officer and the dope dealer have ever had any contact before this incident. He should certainly be investigated to see if there is any corruption--any unaccounted source of income, etc. Investigation does no harm to the person who has nothing hidden. I see no reason to be inconsistent, and I said the same thing when the Vivian lawyer was killed by police in the edge of Arkansas. I don't know that the police were wrong in either case, but it just calls for investigation when the government kills a citizen without due process of law.
ReplyDeleteYou believe that Charles Scott is corrupt and incapable of conducting an adquate investigation? I don't have a problem if the State Attorney General or the US Attorney investigate, I see it as cut and dried.
ReplyDeleteThe John Morneau case, on the other hand, wasn't (in my opinion). I'm sure they will get another investigation, in fact, at this point I hope they do.
In any event, thanks for the comments and the discussion.
No, I don't have a pre-conceived notion about Scott being either corrupt or incompetent, even if he is both a lawyer and a politician. But only those who are completely above reproach in their own lives are qualified to exercise any authority over the rest of us. Federal, state, and local investigation is far better than just local, and an official with nothing to hide also has nothing to fear.
ReplyDelete4:08,
ReplyDeleteIt would help your cause if you actually knew what the he'll you were talking about. Put on a uniform and go out there and try to police before you criticize an officers' decision. Put on a uniform and police for 1 week. I bet you see things different afterwards. You'll see why decisions are made the way they are made.
Your wanting to live in a world of your on ideas. I rather live in a world of laws. If those laws are broken then I want my police officers there to handle the situation promptly.
The deceased's mother is really upset because her cash cow is gone. It's back to cheating on welfare, food stamps, and blaming "whitey" for keeping them down. Good riddance. Officer, stay strong-remember 628 Stoner, 424-0200 is your strongest attorney ally
ReplyDeleteAs an ex cop myself I know the bs that goes on in these two cities. For anyone to come out and second guess what an officer does based solely on race is ridiculous. To be honest I get offended when I hear a group claim to be non racist but yet they have a phrase in their name that if said by a white person is racist (i.e. colored person or colored people). My life changed dramatically in my years as a cop. That is because I was seeing the worst of people everyday. Nobody calls the food to say "hi, we are great and your doing a wonderful job". It's always somebody needing help and what not. I remember one woman yelling cuss words and such at me for arresting her husband after just beat her and then she blamed me for the divorce. It's part of the job and all officers understand that but to have a nobody come in and say the things that get said afterward is like a drunk at a professional fight, he always thinks he can beat up the fighter. As far as the illegal stop thing, it is not against the law for any officer to stop and talk to anybody at any time. You you are not doing anything wrong then you are required to identify yourself cause your just talking, but if the officers has a legal reason such as a bicycle ordinance or your the suspect then yes you are required to identify yourself or face jail time. Terry vs Ohio was landmark. The long and short of it...when any officer kisses his family goodbye and goes to work, that very well could be the last time. All officers want to go home at the end of their shift and see their loved ones. Innocent people don't fight the police unless the police have violated or broken a law (which does happen) but if you attack anybody the natural reaction is to fight back and that is what happened here. Oh and just a though...if racism is to truly end then groups like the naacp need to end cause every race EXCEPT white can have a group like that and that is racist
ReplyDeleteIt is the best time to make some plans for the future and It is time to be happy. I've read this post and if I could I want to suggest you some interesting things or suggestions. Maybe you could write next articles referring to this article. I want to read more things about it!
ReplyDeleteBogs Women's Classic Mid Tuscany Rain Boot
AFRICAN AMERICANS HAS BEEN TREATED TERRIBLY FOR A LONG TIME! SOME PEOPLE TEND TO GET UPSET BECAUSE WE HAVE THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND WE AREN'T ENSLAVED ANYMORE! BUT TO THOSE THAT ARE STILL STUPID,DUMB AND WILL FOREVER BE COWARDS,TRUST ME, YOU ALL HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM COMING YOUR WAY AND TRUST ME YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PRAY FOR YOUR CHILDREN BECAUSE THERE'S SOMEONE OUT THERE THAT'S GONNA RUIN YOUR HAPPY LITTLE HOMES AND DESTROY YOUR FAMILIES. THERE ARE SOME VERY WELL EDUCATED AFRICAN AMERICANS OUT THERE AND I THANK GOD THAT I'M ONE OF THEM, BUT YOU ALL JUST DON'T KNOW THAT YOUR HEADACHE IS COMING AND MY MY MY ITS GONNA BE A HARD PILL TO SWALLOW! SO GOOD JOB NAACP AND KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAID THAT THE AFFLICTION SHALL NOT RISE A SECOND TIME.THANK U JESUS FOR MAKING OUR ENEMIES OUR FOOT STOOL! WHEN THAT PERSON CONVINCES YOUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS TO GET IN THAT CAMOUFLAGE SUIT AND PUT THEM IN THE WOODS WITH THOSE GUNS, I BET RACE IS GOING TO BE THE LAST THING ON YOUR MINDS.LOL LOL
ReplyDelete