Man shoot back at police raid, not guilty

[Gandalf]

SAN ANTONIO - After nine hours of deliberation, a jury has found Adrian Perryman, 52, not guilty on all four counts of aggravated assault on a peace officer charges.

He was accused of shooting and wounding a member of SAPD’s Tactical Response Unit during a raid on Perryman’s home in the 1200 block of West Magnolia in the pre-dawn hours of October 26, 2010.

Whether police announced their arrival during a raid at the home of Perryman was the key point of disagreement during closing arguments Tuesday during Perryman’s trial.

“He said he didn’t hear, ‘Police, police - - search warrant,’" Perryman’s attorney Tony Jimenez told the jury.

During testimony last week Perryman’s girlfriend Rebecca Flores testified that she tossed Perryman a gun when police broke down the door to his home fearing it was a home invasion.

“The door goes down – he shoots,” Jimenez argued. “Was it in the direction of police? Did he know they were police?”

Prosecutors reminded the jury of the testimony of several officers last week. Testimony they argued that calls into question Perryman’s account of the events that night.

They testified that they shouted, “Police! Police!” as they came through the door and again once inside the home.

“I find it hard to believe that you would think they would go as far as to risk their lives – have no regard for themselves – by saying they didn’t say a thing,” prosecutor Steve Spier told the jury.

Pointing to the officers who were in court as spectators listening to closing arguments prosecutor Julie Wright said, “These officers are here with us today because of luck – not because of anything (Perryman) did.”

Perryman had testified that he stopped shooting and tossed down his gun when he realized that it was police officers who burst into his home.

So, this could be an interesting precedent.

[Mr Bean]

The bit this story leaves out and I've read elsewhere is when he tossed the gun and lay down face first they somehow managed to break his nose and wrist when arresting him. Also I'm still amazed at our sentencing laws where you can get four counts of assault for shooting one person.

[Gaidin]

Also I'm still amazed at our sentencing laws where you can get four counts of assault for shooting one person.

Wouldn't that be more for every officer in the raid than just the one he shot?

[Mr Bean]

Also I'm still amazed at our sentencing laws where you can get four counts of assault for shooting one person.

Wouldn't that be more for every officer in the raid than just the one he shot?

It's a symptom of overcharging when the prosecution literally has no drawback to take one incident and inflate as many charges as possible. It's the difference between one drunken joyride being worth 5 years in jail and 90 because of the prosecutors decision. To use that example if I've robbed a bank and I'm running from the cops and I run lets say nine red lights, sidewipe a cop car and end up in someone living room before I'm arrested, in my own head I'd be charging the myself with bank robbery, one count of destruction of property for the house and a second for the police car. But a prosectuor might charge me with ten counts of reckless driving, the bank robbery, resisting arrest (Toss in a few counts for running, then hitting the cop then in the living room) then assault for hitting the police car then the destruction of property charges.


In this case Mr Perryman shot an unmentioned number of times at the police thinking they were home invaders. I'd charge him with a max of one count of aggravated assault as he shot one cop. Since he missed the other three shots (I'm guessing 1 shot = 1 charge or there were 4 cops breaking his door down) I'd leave off on charging him because I already have a single charge. Maybe the prosecutor charged him four times hoping Perryman would agree to a plea deal to take a single charge of aggravated assault who knows.

[Tanasinn]

Guy might want to look into moving, all the same. The local PD is sure to express their asshurt in the days to come with harassment.

[Kamakazie Sith]

The bit this story leaves out and I've read elsewhere is when he tossed the gun and lay down face first they somehow managed to break his nose and wrist when arresting him. Also I'm still amazed at our sentencing laws where you can get four counts of assault for shooting one person.

Are you sure it wasn't because he fired in the direction of four persons? In most states if you fire at someone that is aggravated assault. You don't have to hit them.

[Mr Bean]

Are you sure it wasn't because he fired in the direction of four persons? In most states if you fire at someone that is aggravated assault. You don't have to hit them.

So if i fired at one person who happen to be standing in a crowd of twenty people that's twenty counts of aggravated assault?
That's what I mean by one act becoming multiple charges.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Are you sure it wasn't because he fired in the direction of four persons? In most states if you fire at someone that is aggravated assault. You don't have to hit them.

So if i fired at one person who happen to be standing in a crowd of twenty people that's twenty counts of aggravated assault?
That's what I mean by one act becoming multiple charges.

It could depending on if it was reasonable that those who were claiming to be victims had reasonable fear that they could be hit by your rounds.

You can be charged with aggravated assault simply by brandishing a firearm and saying "I will shoot you".

EDIT - Overcharging does exist but this likely isn't one of those examples unless it was unreasonable for those three other officers to fear being struck by rounds.

[Mr Bean]

EDIT - Overcharging does exist but this likely isn't one of those examples unless it was unreasonable for those three other officers to fear being struck by rounds.

The story mentions he fired at the people breaking down his front door so unless those four were stacked up on his front door it is possible to be overcharging. However it is also very possible as four is the standard number for a breach and clear then you might be correct.

[Simon_Jester]

Another thing that makes the case interesting is that it would have been trivially easy for the police to confirm that they shouted "police!" if they were wearing recorders. On the other hand, in that case it would also have been trivially easy for the defendant to get away with the shooting if they didn't shout "police!"