File:Bodycam Captures Intense Police Shootout in San Diego, California.webm
Original file (WebM audio/video file, VP9/Opus, length 7 min 34 s, 1,920 × 1,080 pixels, 1.25 Mbps overall, file size: 67.72 MB)
Captions
Captions
Summary
[edit]| Description |
English: The District Attorney's office has completed its review of a violent incident last year in which two San Diego police officers were shot, officers were forced to scramble for cover and return fire, and the suspect eventually took his own life. On June 23, 2018, San Diego Police officers were called to a condominium unit in the College area to investigate a violent disturbance. Officers smelled smoke coming from the condo and called firefighters to assess the situation. Police knocked on the door for more than 20 minutes but got no response. To ensure there was no fire danger, fire personnel forced entry into the home. Joe Darwish, 28, immediately opened fire on police and fire officials with a large caliber weapon, striking one police officer in the back. Two officers returned fire while backing away from the residence, providing cover for the wounded officer. The officer who had been shot fell onto his back and was initially unable to move. After several seconds, he managed to roll onto his stomach and was able to crawl down the hallway in an attempt to get out of the line of fire. During the ensuing gun battle, a second police officer was shot by Darwish.
Darwish fired at least twenty-two shots at police. Eventually, the shooting stopped and Darwish was found dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to his head. He had also been struck in the arm and face from one of the officers' shotgun fire. The San Diego Medical Examiner ruled Darwish's death a suicide. "This harrowing incident shows just how quickly a routine call for service can turn deadly for police officers who suddenly found themselves in the line of fire, trying to protect their wounded fellow officers and keep the shooter from endangering members of the public," said District Attorney Summer Stephan. "It's a tribute to these officers' bravery and quick response that the gunman didn't injure more people or kill the officers and firefighters involved." Darwish was wearing a bullet-proof vest and was armed with a homemade assault weapon and a homemade 9 mm semi-automatic pistol. Neither weapon had a serial number and the guns were not registered. After a thorough review, the District Attorney's Office determined officers were justified in using deadly force to defend against Darwish's attempts to kill them and others. Both officers who were shot survived their injuries. The DA’s detailed analysis can be found here: https://www.sdcda.org/office/Darwish%20OIS.pdf |
| Date | |
| Source | YouTube: Bodycam Captures Intense Police Shootout in San Diego, California – View/save archived versions on archive.org and archive.today |
| Author | SDPD |
Licensing
[edit]
|
This work was created by a government unit (including state, county, city, and municipal government agencies) that derives its powers from the laws of the State of California and is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Government Code § 6250 et seq.). It is a public record that was not created by an agency which state law has allowed to claim copyright, and is therefore in the public domain in the United States.
Records subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act
Pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code § 6250 et seq.) "Public records" include "any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics." (Cal. Gov't. Code § 6252(e).) notes that "[a]ll public records are subject to disclosure unless the Public Records Act expressly provides otherwise." County of Santa Clara v. CFAC California Government Code § 6254 lists categories of documents not subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. In addition, computer software is not considered a public record, while data and statistics collected (whether collected knowingly or unknowingly) by a government authority whose powers derive from the laws of California are public records (such as license plate reader images) pursuant to EFF & ACLU of Southern California v. Los Angeles Police Department & Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and are not exempt from disclosure and are public records. Although the act only covers “writing,” the Act, pursuant to Government Code § 6252(g), states: “Writing” means any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, photocopying, transmitting by electronic mail or facsimile, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof, and any record thereby created, regardless of the manner in which the record has been stored. Agencies permitted to claim copyright
California's Constitution and its statutes do not permit any agency to claim copyright for "public records" unless authorized to do so by law. The following agencies are permitted to claim copyright and any works of these agencies should be assumed to be copyrighted outside of the United States without clear evidence to the contrary:
County of Santa Clara v. CFAC held that the State of California, or any government entity which derives its power from the State, cannot enforce a copyright in any record subject to the Public Records Act in the absence of another state statute giving it the authority to do so. This applies even if there is a copyright notice, so long as the State of California or one of its agencies (other than those listed above) is indicated as the copyright holder. Note: Works that are considered "public records" but were not created by a state or municipal government agency may be copyrighted by their author; the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution prevents state law from overriding the author's right to copyright protection that is granted by federal law. For example, a state agency may post images online of the final appearance of a building under construction; while the images may have to be released by such agency since they are public records, their creator (eg. architecture/construction firm) retains copyright rights to these images unless the contract with the agency says otherwise. See: Government-in-the-Sunshine Manual: To what extent does federal law preempt state law regarding public inspection of records?. Copyrightable Works by the State in the United States: Works published by agencies that are permitted to claim copyright per state law should be tagged with {{PD-US-GovEdict}} instead of this template due to the reasons listed on that template. Disclaimer: The information provided, especially the list of agencies permitted to claim copyright, may not be complete. Wikimedia Commons makes no guarantee of the adequacy or validity of this information in this template (see disclaimer). |
 |
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
| Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| current | 14:35, 20 May 2023 | 7 min 34 s, 1,920 × 1,080 (67.72 MB) | Illegitimate Barrister (talk | contribs) | Imported media from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwhfPDjfIxE |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage on Commons
The following page uses this file: