myBurbank Talks
myBurbank Talks
Deep Plunge into the California Attorney General's Report on the Officer Involved Shooting at Home Depot in May of 2023
What are the real implications of a split-second decision in a life-or-death situation? Join us as we tackle the intricate circumstances surrounding the officer-involved shooting of Ruben Ramos at a Burbank Home Depot, guided by insights from John and Jenny of Notebook LM. Promising a closer look beyond the headlines, we carefully dissect the Attorney General's 31-page report, which scrutinizes the tense standoff between Ramos and Burbank police officers. Through analyzing 911 calls, witness statements, and the legal ramifications, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the tragic events and the potential role of mental health resources in such crises.
Our conversation goes beyond the immediate incident, exploring the broader themes of police training, mental health, and the nuanced use of force in high-pressure situations. We challenge the quick judgments often formed in the wake of such incidents, urging listeners to consider the broader implications and continue the dialogue on these vital issues. By reflecting on the Department of Justice report, we strive to foster informed discussions, encouraging our audience to think critically and seek deeper understanding. This episode is not just a recount of events—it's a call to question, learn, and engage with the complexities of policing and mental health in our communities.
From the media district adjacent. It's time to take another deep plunge into the issues and topics that face Burbank. Let's see what we have on the plate to dissect today. Hello Burbank, Craig Sherwood, coming to you from the my Burbank Command Center, and today, something very concerning we think you should listen to. It's the Attorney General's final report on the fatal officer-involved shooting at Home Depot that occurred on May 27, 2023. We asked John and Jenny from Notebook LM to weigh in on it. It's a 31-page report. We also have a story on our website, but we thought it might be good to have an audio version also. The interesting thing about this is that my Burbank was tipped off about the report being finalized. We did not receive any type of release from the Burbank Police Department or the city of Burbank, so thank you to the person who tipped us off and let us know that this report had come out on October 9th. We thought it was important that you heard what the Attorney General had to say, so go ahead and take it away, john and Jenny. All right.
Speaker 2:Let's dive into a tough one today. So we're unpacking the May 2023 shooting of Ruben Ramos at a Burbank Home Depot and we're going beyond the headlines on this one. We've got the full California DOJ report. Ok, witness statements Right. 9-1-1 calls the evidence log autopsy. It's all right here.
Speaker 3:It's about painting the fullest possible picture, isn't it? Because these situations are never simple. We're going to try to break down exactly what led up to that fateful encounter, and then we'll examine it through the lens of California law on use of force.
Speaker 2:Exactly, and it all starts on what seemed like a normal Saturday afternoon with a very stressed out phone call.
Speaker 3:Yes, the 911 call Ruben Ramos made to California Highway Patrol is really our starting point. He's convinced his daughter's been kidnapped, he's incredibly distraught and he tells the dispatcher he's armed and at the Home Depot.
Speaker 2:Oh wow, you can just hear the tension in his voice. Oh yeah, and to make matters worse, just minutes before that call, someone else had called 911, reporting a minivan blowing through stop signs and red lights. Oh no, a minivan that turned out to be Ruben Ramos's. Wow, so now the dispatcher is relaying that information to Burbank PD. Oh boy, it's like a powder keg just waiting for a spark.
Speaker 3:Yeah, and tragically, that spark arrives in the form of Officer Ricardo Perez, the first officer on the scene. Put yourself in his shoes for a second. It's a busy Saturday, the Home Depot parking lot is packed and you're responding to a call about an armed and possibly dangerous individual.
Speaker 2:Talk about a high-pressure situation and, according to the report, it gets even more intense when Officer Perez actually sees Ramos. He's getting out of his minivan and he's got his right hand concealed in his pocket.
Speaker 3:That single detail raises the stakes Right. The DOJ report highlights that detail again and again. It speaks directly to what Officer Perez is perceiving at that moment.
Speaker 2:It's easy for us to sit here and say well, we know he didn't have a gun in his pocket, but in that moment Officer Perez doesn't have that luxury. He has to make a judgment call based on very limited information.
Speaker 3:And that judgment call, that split second assessment of the situation, is where the legal concept of subjective versus objective belief comes into play. We'll dive deeper into the legal stuff in a bit, but the key takeaway here is that the DOJ has to determine whether Officer Perez's actions were objectively reasonable, given everything he knew at that time.
Speaker 2:So Officer Perez takes cover behind his patrol car weapon drawn. Moments later, officer Jose Plasencia arrives. Now this wasn't just a quick show me your hands situation. This was an extended interaction. How long did it actually last?
Speaker 3:14 minutes. For 14 minutes, Officer Plasencia issued command after command urging Ruben Ramos to show his hands. Wow, the report states he issued approximately 33 commands in total 33 commands in 14 minutes.
Speaker 2:That's more than two commands every minute. I know you have to wonder. What must that have been like for everyone involved? Yeah, the bystanders. Ruben Ramos himself.
Speaker 3:The DOJ report emphasizes the idea of the totality of the circumstances, and that includes considering whether the officers did everything they could to de-escalate the situation. Did they exhaust all reasonable options before resorting to deadly force?
Speaker 2:Right, and the report actually points out that Officer Placencia wasn't just barking orders Right, he was trying to build rapport with Ramos, even offering to help find his daughter. Oh wow, he's trying to appeal to him on a human level, despite the inherent danger of the situation.
Speaker 3:And it's important to note that during those 14 minutes Officer Placencia wasn't able to just go handle another call. This single incident was tying up a good portion of the Burbank police force. Really, sergeant Martha Jimenez, officer Jevin Fabian, officer Peter Choi, they were all on scene.
Speaker 2:Wow. So you've got this one incident rapidly escalating, pulling in more and more resources. Tension must have been palpable, and it wasn't just other officers responding to the scene. The report mentions that Sergeant Aaron Kay, one of the officers who arrived, actually considered calling in a mental health evaluation team, the MHET. They weren't available at the time, but it really makes you think what if they had been, could it have changed the outcome?
Speaker 3:That's a question that lingers, doesn't it? It's impossible to say for sure, but it highlights a crucial point. The DOJ raises the need for readily available mental health resources to support law enforcement, especially in these high pressure situations than they appear on the surface.
Speaker 2:You've got the immediate safety concerns, but then you've also got these underlying mental health factors that might be driving the behavior of someone like Ruben Ramos.
Speaker 3:And unfortunately, in this case, the situation continued to escalate even further, with Ruben Ramos still refusing to show his hands. After 14 minutes, the officers decided to use a less lethal option. Officer Manuel Maldonado was called in with a 40mm launcher.
Speaker 2:For our listeners who aren't familiar. Could you explain what that is exactly?
Speaker 3:It's not your typical firearm. The 40mm launcher is designed to be less lethal, firing a sponge round that's meant to incapacitate but not kill. Think of it as a way to temporarily subdue someone without resorting to deadly force.
Speaker 2:So they were trying to find a way to de-escalate, but even that didn't have the intended effect on Mr Ramos.
Speaker 3:Sadly no. The report says he was hit in the torso, flinched, but then continued moving erratically. In fact, some officers perceived his movements as becoming even more evasive after being hit.
Speaker 2:And this is where things take that tragic turn Right. This is when Ruben Ramos moves towards a Volkswagen parked next to his minivan. The report and multiple witness statements say he pulls something out of his pocket. What happens next?
Speaker 3:It happens in a split second. Right Officers on scene report seeing him pull out an object which they believe to be a gun and take what the report calls a shooting stance, that's when shots are fired.
Speaker 2:And, of course, we know now that the object in his hand wasn't a gun. What did the investigation reveal?
Speaker 3:The investigation found a partially open black folding knife near his body A crucial detail because in that moment, under immense pressure, officers had to make a life or death decision based on what they perceived.
Speaker 2:And that brings us back to the legal complexities we touched on earlier. The DOJ isn't tasked with deciding whether this was a tragedy, because clearly it was. They have to determine, based on California law, whether the shooting was legally justified.
Speaker 3:Right, and this is where it gets really nuanced. In California, the burden of proof is on the Department of Justice to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officers did not act in self-defense. It's a high bar to clear.
Speaker 2:Beyond a reasonable doubt. Can you break that down for us a little? What does that actually mean in this context?
Speaker 3:Essentially it means the evidence has to be so strong that no other logical explanation can be made. It's not about whether there's a shadow of a doubt, but whether a reasonable person looking at the evidence could conclude that the officers acted unlawfully.
Speaker 2:And how does the concept of subjective versus objective belief play into all of this?
Speaker 3:Good question. The DOJ has to consider both. First, did the officers believe in that moment that they were in danger? Right, that's the subjective part. That moment that they were in danger? Right, that's the subjective part. But just as importantly, was that belief objectively reasonable, given everything a reasonable officer would?
Speaker 2:have known or perceived in the same situation. So it's not enough for an officer to simply say they felt threatened. The DOJ has to determine if a hypothetical reasonable officer would have felt the same way given the same information and circumstances Exactly.
Speaker 3:The DOJ report cites several factors in reaching its decision the initial 911 call where Ruben Ramos stated he was armed. His erratic behavior in the parking lot. Witness statements describing his movements. The perceived threat of the knife.
Speaker 2:And we have to remember he was about 28 feet away from the officers when they opened fire. That's less than the length of a basketball court. It happened incredibly fast.
Speaker 3:You're right, the element of time is crucial here. The DOJ concluded that the officers had only a matter of seconds to assess the threat and make a decision. Based on all the evidence and the compressed time frame, they determined that the officers' belief that deadly force was necessary was, in fact, objectively reasonable.
Speaker 2:So we've walked through this incredibly tense standoff moment by moment and then looked at it through the very specific lens of California law. But as thorough as this DOJ report is, it doesn't answer every question, does it.
Speaker 3:It doesn't. And one detail that really stuck with me was the accidental discharge. You remember, right after the shots that killed Ruben Ramos, Officer Caldwell unintentionally fired his 40 millimeter launcher Right. He was startled by the gunfire wasn't aimed at anyone, but still it makes you think about the sheer sensory overload of that moment.
Speaker 2:Absolutely. We can talk about these situations clinically, but in that moment it's chaos, the adrenaline is pumping, you've got shouting, maybe screaming. It's a stark reminder that even highly trained professionals are human and they're operating under incredible stress.
Speaker 3:And that actually feeds into one of the DOJ's recommendations for the Burbank Police Department. They're suggesting a policy change. After any critical incident like this one, Officers would be required to check all their weapons even if they're absolutely certain they didn't fire intentionally.
Speaker 2:Kind of like a trust, but verify approach.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Especially with something as crucial as an accidental discharge.
Speaker 3:Exactly Because that unintentional discharge it's not just about one officer. It could point to broader issues of training or equipment that might otherwise go unnoticed. It's about constantly evaluating and improving, even in the wake of tragedy.
Speaker 2:And speaking of improvement, the DOJ also had some thoughts on the mental health evaluation team, that specialized unit Sergeant K considered calling Right, and this is where the report goes beyond the specifics of this one case and starts to address the bigger picture.
Speaker 3:Burbank PD has been working to expand their MHET program, which is a positive step, but the DOJ report encourages them to go further. They suggest extending the hours those teams are available and maybe even implementing more specialized training for all officers on recognizing and responding to mental health crises.
Speaker 2:Because even if the MHET hadn't been available in this exact scenario, there are always going to be other situations, other 911 calls, where that specialized training could de-escalate things before they reach such a tragic breaking point.
Speaker 3:It's about recognizing that sometimes what's needed isn't just a law enforcement response, but a mental health response as well.
Speaker 2:So where does this leave us? We've unpacked the events, the evidence, the law. What's your biggest takeaway from this deep dive?
Speaker 3:Honestly, it's the weight of perspective. We have Officer Perez making a split-second decision based on what he sees in a highly stressful situation. We have Ruben Ramos, clearly in the midst of a mental health crisis, his actions driven by fear and desperation. And then we have the witnesses everyday people going about their day suddenly thrust into this terrifying scene. Their accounts sometimes even contradict each other, which highlights how differently we process trauma.
Speaker 2:It's a reminder that there's rarely a single easy answer in these cases, isn't it? It's messy, it's complex and it stays with everyone involved.
Speaker 3:It does, and I think that's what makes this kind of deep dive so important, because it's easy to get caught up in the headlines, the quick judgments, but when you really take the time to unpack it all, to examine it from multiple angles, it challenges you to sit with the complexity.
Speaker 2:And maybe, just maybe, that act of grappling with the nuances helps us have more informed conversations, not just about this case, but about the broader issues it raises police training, mental health resources, the use of force. These are conversations we need to keep having.
Speaker 3:Absolutely, because even with the most thorough investigation, there are always more questions to ask.
Speaker 2:And that's where we leave it to you, our listeners. We've gone deep into the DOJ report but, as with all our dives, this is just the starting point. What will you take away from this case? What questions will you continue to explore Until next time? Keep asking those tough questions, you.