Hey, there! Log in / Register
DA: Officer fired in self defense when he fatally shot man shooting at him in Dorchester in 2013
By adamg on Fri, 08/21/2015 - 3:59pm
Suffolk County District Attorney Dan Conley said today a police officer was justified in shooting Roudy Hendricks in Dorchester in 2013 because he started shooting first - and hit both the officer and his partner.
"Officer [Harry] Jean's discharge of his service weapon in return was a reasonable and lawful exercise of self-defense and defense of another against Mr. Hendricks's armed assault," a report by Conley's office says.
According to the report, Hendricks and an accomplice both lifted their shirts to show off guns when they spotted two plainclothes officers in a car on Shepton Street, just off Dorchester Avenue, around 1:45 p.m. on Aug. 7:
The second man threw out his hands in a threatening or taunting gesture. Recognizing the two men to be armed, Jean and his partner exited their vehicle, drew their service weapons, and announced themselves as police officers. Hendricks' associate immediately fled on foot. Hendricks, however, opened fire.
Both officers were struck by the gunfire, as was a commercial vehicle travelling northbound on Dorchester Avenue at this very moment. The passenger's side window of that truck shattered and both occupants sustained minor injuries from the flying glass but were not struck by bullets.
Jean's partner, who had taken cover behind a vehicle, did not fire. Jean returned fire from two locations, striking Hendricks three times. Hendricks was transported to Boston Medical Center, where he died of his injuries.
Conley continued:
Officer Jean's decision to return gunfire, after being shot and while under continued assault, was a lawful and reasonable exercise of self-defense and defense of his fellow officer. Accordingly, I have determined that criminal charges are not warranted.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 Hendricks shooting report | 202.02 KB |
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
What took so long
It took 2 years to determine that an officer who was shot was legally justified to return fire.
Hero.
Sorry it took a year to establish Officer Jean was doing his job and not performing a "criminal" act.
Agreed. Imagine if his
Agreed. Imagine if his department had placed him on unpaid administrative leave like so many on here clamor for all the time..
Uh
Why are you sorry that the system worked the way it should?
I'm sure your cavalier attitude would differ if it was your
ass in the sling.
Yeah
Checks and balances on the use of lethal force are so worrisome and inconvenient.
Yes especially when innocent young people like Jamyla Bolden
or Dawn Jaffier are murdered in cold blood while their neighbors turn a blind eye to murder and violence then blame the police.
Ahem....two years. TWO!
Ahem....two years. TWO!
Noted
Thank you!
So, what, we should be more hasty next time?
.
Glad to hear the good guys
Glad to hear the good guys won. Was there ever any doubt here? Oh wait, I forgot this was a police hating blog in a largely police hating town. My bad.
Oh
relax.
Police hating blog?
No more than I am a kid hating parent when I expect my kids to follow the rules.
but are they presumed
guilty?
No
But they aren't above the law and supervision by their communities.
(Unless you are talking about the teenagers caught by parents, and then, yes, guilty!)
No one said they are "above the law"...
And "supervision by their communities"? What the hell does that even mean? What do you know about police work that would qualify you to supervise any law enforcement officer? Let them work. You don't see me wagging a finger in your face while you're trying to do your job that I'm sure you think is the most important thing ever. And I get that you're working the whole, "I pay taxes, so I'm their boss" angle. Spare me. I pay taxes too, but I don't presume to think that I have any authority over the police. While we certainly have consitutional rights, but we are not their bosses, no matter how much you civilians stomp your feet and demand they follow your orders. Go down to police HQ and fire them, if you're so powerful. I humbly await your snarky reply.
Swirly is probably too busy
Swirly is probably too busy to snark back since she's at the station firing the pesant worthless lower life forms known as law enforcement. She thinks society can handle criminals, but will be the last person to offer a place in her house to a criminal who needs a second chance.
Oh Republican
Funny how your ilk lives in paranoid fantasy land about home invasions, demands small government, yet doesn't question how your money is spent on no-bid military contracts or militarized police conducting home invasions under color of law.
You know absolutely nothing of my family, my upbringing, or who I support, either. You'd best stop right there while you are ahead.
Run along and watch your weekly Trump porn now.
Here's the Problem
When communities "just let cops work" we end up with fraternal organizations that protect their drinking buddies against mounting evidence of their unfitness for police work or even walking free in society.
Exhibit A: http://medford.wickedlocal.com/article/20150814/NEWS/150817539
From a retired immigration officer harassed in a private lot:
Just another classic example of why the police should not be allowed to investigate the police. Internal affairs should be limited to minor infractions, not major allegations that all and sundry have every reason to paper over. The police work for all of us, and they need to be accountable to the communities they serve.
Great. Except the police did
Great. Except the police did not investigate the police here. The DA did. And he found that they acted within their authority. Swirly, I have always wanted to ask you the following, respectfully:
1) Where did you (truthfully) grow up? (Yes. It matters).
2) Can you described (honestly) your interactions with the Boston Police?
SwirlyGrrl, there's a bill in committee
SwirlyGrrl, there's a bill in committee that changes the way police-involved shootings that result in homicide or bodily injury is investigated. The AGs office not the county DA will do initial investigation. This obviates the potential conflict of interest between DAs and local police departments. Then the Governor will appoint a special prosecutor if probable cause of a crime is found.
How's that again?
Was Mr. Jean in prison this whole time? Was he even fired?
No? Then where is the presumption of guilt?
While I'm glad the DA found the officer was justified, I'm not sorry they took the time to thoroughly investigate it.
That's the thing: the police
That's the thing: the police aren't your kids. You equating them as such is part of the problem. Have some respect.
No, they aren't
But, like all those who we support with our money, they aren't immune to question and oversight, and don't get to pitch fits when subjected to such.
Defending your life isn't
Defending your life isn't "pitching a fit". They were under gunfire. One officer ducked for cover, the other responded with the force he was met with. Have you ever once been in that situation?
I'm guessing no.
Hello. As a Boston Police
Hello. As a Boston Police Officer, I find your comments not only slightly offensive, but laughable. Luckily, most of us have become pretty thick-skinned, as I've been called every insult imaginable (especially as a minority Officer).
I think the most ridiculous of them all though are the ones of your ilk. Yes, your taxes pay my salary. And yes, we can be handsomely paid with them. But no, because of this, you do not have dominion over me. Quite the contrary, actually. Being an officer is something I take very, very seriously. It is not lost on me that I can lawfully take a life. It is an incredible power. I don't even take lightly the fact that I can take you out of society and put you in a cage if you have violated laws that better men and women than us have created.
What seems lost on you though is that if you are respectful to us, we will be respectful to you. You seem incapable of this, a concept that appears unfathomable. I will admit, like you, it is easy to write these words in anonymity, behind the safety of a computer screen. It's quite something else to approach me and say what you do publicly. In fact, if you ever feel that I'm acting beyond my power, by all means, film away. (I support body cameras, because I think people will actually be horrified seeing what we see on a regular basis and it will indemnify 99.99% of us from false accusations).
I get that you don't like us. Not many people do right now it seems. But I wish you could walk a mile in our shoes. Go do a midnight tour in Roxbury or Mattapan (and please leave race out of it, as those are de facto our two busiest districts). Once you legitimately fear for your life, wondering if this call will be your last, you will hopefully learn to at least respect our profession.
And if you ever need us, please don't hesitate to call 911!
Thank you
But in reality, you won't find the person you're responding to in B-2, B-3, or anywhere the YVSF might concentrate their efforts. They'll be at home in the 'burbs criticizing you from the comfort of their bubble.
BPD policy regarding applying force to the neck
Chris Caesar: "strangling" was the wrong word here, though I am still curious about department policies regarding applying force to the neck.
Life is so simple
The police aren't automatically the good guys. They should be but people are fallible and the police are people too.
The person that police are shooting at aren't automatically bad guys. We've seen enough people killed by police in the past year to know that not all of them were bad guys. They were misidentified, police were misled, or cops were completely off their rocker to go to deadly force so immediately but end up killing someone who wasn't a bad guy. And even when they are bad guys, there are plenty that are dead now that shouldn't be because we don't empower the police to kill as judge, jury, and executioner.
But I'm sure life is simpler for you to understand and grapple with when cops=good, black=bad, anyone who criticizes police tactics=hates all police, you=All-American because you root for the 'good guys' to always be right and kill every 'bad guy' and only the bad guys. As long as there's no room for any alternatives in your analysis, you're on the winning team and the rest of us are on the evil losing team and somehow this whole thing when boiled down to that stupid of a sports metaphor is the only way for you to come to grips with reality.
Grow up.
Easy now...
No one else but you is trying to bring race into this. Relax.
"Boston Police Officer" did first
He's afraid, not because of race but because Roxbury and Mattapan are really busy, "Once you legitimately fear for your life, wondering if this call will be your last.." He says that being busy responding to calls in Roxbury and Mattapan should engender our respect for his authoritay.
So not true. Boston is far
So not true. Boston is far from a police hating town the police here do a pretty good job .at taking care of the citizens and there is good relations here which is why we haven't suffered the rioting and other problems EXCEPT the shit that happens during Red Sox : sports play offs when the COLLEGE students who aren't from here start rioting because they are so happy? Selfish twits caused way more damage than any other event.
I respect your comment. My
I respect your comment. My initial comment was aimed more towards the conspiracy theorists who frequent some of the posts. Of course there are bad cops, but it's not resonable to think more cops are bad than good. I have never had issues with police so cannot relate to distaste in police.
BPD's restrained use of lethal force
Boston police tend to be restrained in both use of force and use of lethal force as compared to say St Louis County police officers.
When lethal force is used and it causes injury or death, the investigation should not be conducted by the DA as they have a potential conflict of interest. There's a proposal to have it investigated by the AG.
Officers who lie to investigators during an investigation of a police-involved shooting or other use of force resulting in injury or death should be held accountable to the same standard as persons who lie to federal law enforcement officers during an investigation. It is a crime. One of the problems we have during investigations is that an officer tries to avoid accountability for actions by inventing a story and other officers on the scene are under some pressure to corroborate, thus widening the circle of corruption.