Well, if 3 rounds were fired into the car, they should be able to dig out 3 bullets from a gun other than the officers' from the car. That doesn't exclude the possibility that one of the cops shot into the car after the kid was killed with a different gun, but it would at least tend to support the cops' story. If bullets can't be found, that would tend to eviscerate the cops' story.

One bullet struck the car. Also, of the eight the cops fired, one actually hit the kid. In the head. He was pronounced dead at hospital but may have been dead on scene.

This proves one thing. Even DC cops know that the DC cops couldn't solve a crime with 2 witnesses, a taped confession, and video tape. Who you gonna call? Not 911.

This is shaping up to be ugly, either way it turns out. MPD needs to get it's act together and investigate this asap. I wouldn't put it past individual MPD officers to make up a story, but I also wouldn't put it past a 14 year old in DC to be carrying a gun and to fire it at others. It wouldn't exactly be the first time.

The sooner we get some answers in this one the better.

$5 says the kid would still be alive if he didn't break into someone else's house and take their stuff. If the kid is willing to do this, you don't think he isn't armed? The kids in my neighborhood are--I've watched the same kids waiting for the bus during the day shoot guns at night as they show off for friends--and I've called the cops which never come.

@Guest #6. Thats a pretty big assumption. Especially since there is no evidence the kid even had a gun yet. If *I* just shot and killed someone for shooting at me. I'd make damned sure the gun they used didn't "disappear".

The incident did take place in a high crime area of the city where too many youth seem to get their hands on guns.

Who knows what the truth is.

quest #6, you seem exceptionally prepared to accept the testimony of the 2 officers at this time. Even given the possibility that they may be telling the truth on all the facts, they exhibited gross negligence for failing to secure the crime scene enough not lose the supposed perp’s gun. That seems quite baffling, seeing how at least one of the officers was armed.

Now, given the possibility that the officers may have shot into the car themselves with another gun (possibly unregistered). Too bad the gun disappeared, huh? Now forensics won’t be able to examine it. If the cops doctored this crime scene, my money is on them getting away with it.

Guest 14: I'll answer that morality question for you. The person that thinks that if someone is shot defending property in DC that's ok if FAR superior morally to the dirtbag stealing the property, especially if that dirtbag is armed and/or invading your home. The only justifiable theft is to keep you or your family from starving. And that just ain't the case with thefts and home invasions in DC.

I don't know. A Xerox jam can be mighty frustrating. Especially if you've got your wanker caught in it, as has probably happened in more than one late-night workplace here....

Matlock, CSI, Law & Order. We're all experts now beitches!!

Mini bike! Hah! Bling, Bling.

Some of us prefer using the fax machine.

I am glad this 14 yo died before he could kill anyone else or take my bike.

Good lord. First of all, just because "no eye witnesses have been identified" does not mean that there weren't thirty people there when it happened. It just means that none of those people are willing to say they saw anything. Secondly, what doesn't make sense about this? The facts you outlined make perfect sense. We know the kid was at a minimum in possession of stolen property, probably broke in a house and stole that property, and was probably armed. Why is it so hard to believe that he would be willing to shoot somebody? I think guest #6 gave a pretty accurate summation. Good freakin' riddance.

And who says the 14 year old was the one who took the bike in the first place? He could have gotten it from a friend, etc.

Okay, let's ask the question, why is it wrong to take someone's life? The moral answer is because life is sacred. The ethical answer is because we want to preserve our own lives, so we say that all lives should collectively be preserved or at least protected culturally, as in the human life = should be held in high enough esteem that taking a life is taboo/illegal. You know, rule of law and all that.

Whether we go with the moral or ethical reasoning here, human life = human life. It's not morally or ethically defensible to mock the death of someone, as others have done in this thread, just as it isn't morally or ethically defensible to point a gun at someone and shoot them. So while the child in question may have been about to kill someone, which is under debate, it's questionable to laugh about his death, EVEN WHILE what he might have been doing is also wrong.

Pretend that we were better about putting ourselves in the footsteps of someone else. If he was your child, you would both be angry at him for putting himself in this situation and for behaving as he did, and mourn his death. It is possible to be outraged and respectful at the same time.

I don't know about that Everett.

I don't see many people laughing about this kid's death. But I do see people saying that if he pulled a gun he had it coming. Fairly big difference there.

Do I feel bad for the kid's mom? Of course. But if he's pulling a gun on cops and breaking into people's houses it's just sortof hard for me to find sympathy for him.

Some thug kid got capped living the thug life.
His dreams came true!

"Somebody shot the vehicle the police were riding in, I suspect that if one of the two cops had done that we'd know that already...."

Why or how would we know that already? Unless, of course, we are tuning off our powers of reason to halt any questioning of the possibility that these officers are not being 100% truthful.

I am still reeling from the fact that (apparently) a DC cop ACTUALLY LIVES in DC! They should be required to do so, along with Ambulance and Fire Dep't personnel so they can respond quickly to emergencies, as well as have a stake in this city.

I was a witness to a police chase off U Street a few years ago, where two guys shot up a cab. Didn't actually shoot the driver, but the cops on foot,bike, and car were in pursuit, and the bad guy threw the gun down on the ground right in front of me. They caught the perp a few blocks away, but the gun just lay there until I flagged down a late-arriving officer to retrieve it.

Even if they are professionals, the cops have a lot of adrenalin after being shot at, and I can see how it would be "chaotic" and certainly someone else could have walked off with the gun if I hadn't stayed with it. And, then I had to testify to what I saw, etc., chain of evidence 3 times over the years.

"Some thug kid got capped living the thug life.
His dreams came true!"

I agree with Everett that some people are being incredibly dismissive here, almost to the point of gloating. Whenever there is any post that involves teenagers in certain neighborhoods, the level of vitriol goes through the roof. I read the article and I don't see anything that indicates he is a "thug". I don't see anything about behavioral problems or a record (though he is only 14). I understand that if this kid fired a gun at police officers (even if there was nothing identifying them as such), they had to shoot him. However, I don't see proof that he broke into anyone's home. Who knows how he got the bike? Shouldn't such questions be saved for a trial? I think there are some really legitimate questions that people have already mentioned. Where is the gun? Is there physical evidence this kid fired a gun? etc. Either way, I think that when a 14 yr old dies, it is tragic.

"I am glad this 14 yo died before he could kill anyone else or take my bike."

"I hope more thugs get shot for stealing."

"good riddance. one less hoodlum gunning for me."

"I think guest #6 gave a pretty accurate summation. Good freakin' riddance."

I don't know WHY I think anyone's being disrespectful . . . ! You're right, he wasn't a person, he was just a thug. Shit, let's hang some nooses from the trees and string them all up!

You people amaze me.

I don't know WHY I think anyone's being disrespectful . . . ! You're right, he wasn't a person, he was just a thug. Shit, let's hang some nooses from the trees and string them all up!

----

Everett, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. You're sadly wrong in your analysis. Cut it out.

where were the parents in all this? why did they let their 14-year-old run around like this at night?
they, ultimately, bear some responsibility for what happened--but no one is talking about this.

Invisible Sun, the shooting occurred at 7:30pm! That hardly is an example of parents letting their kid run around at all hours of the night.

Everett:

I'm not going to apologize for thinking that a 14 year old that pulls a gun and shoots at cops is a thug, and that he deserves to get shot. He stopped being a sweet innocent kid the second he started shooting at other people (assuming he did in fact do so).

And I'm not going to apologize for attacking the thug lifestyle.

My sense of empathy for this sort of crap died a slow, painful death, DC-style, having had those that glorify and excuse the thug lifestyle do everything from steal petty stuff from me, break into my home, and attack me at gunpoint.

So, no. No empathy. Sorry. I'm fresh out.

Since it appears that Greedo shot first, this sounds like self-defense on the cop's part. The kid got shot before he could shoot anyone else. Sad, but going around shooting people doesn't seem to me to be the best way of spending one's leisure time.

I remember the "Murder Capital" days when DC's death toll almost hit 500 a year. The vast majority of those deaths were teens and early twenties, like this kid. Then there are were the bystanders who were killed in the perpetual drivebys. I'm amazed nobody else got shot in this incident.

I can't see a dcist thread as a great place to find sympathy for anything.

gerhardj: I guess you've never gone to Gothamist.. a thread like this over there would be much worse. I doubt they're going to institute a moderation system, aside from the current practice of admins deleting especially nasty comments.

He didn't get shot because he stole the bike, but because he pulled a gun and fired at two armed men who fired back in self defense.

Heh, this from Fenty, attempting to reassure the public: "We'll do a full investigation," Fenty said. "If I wanted to sweep this under the rug, I wouldn't be here. I would have stayed downtown."

So now we know what to think when he stays downtown? What a tell! He must suck at poker!

To #46,

The post is titled "Police Account of Fatal Shooting
Doesn't Add Up" because the police account of fatal shooting doesn't add up. The police story is fishy.

Actually that's not true at all. The police story is "the kid shot at us, we shot the kid, we didn't secure the crime scene and now the gun is missing"

The author of the post is injecting disbelief into the situation by saying that his doesn't add up.

As far as the media's continuing coverage, the only way you will hear more about this is if there isn't residue on the kid's hands.

I guarantee you will not see a post on this blog titled:
Gunpowder residue on shooter's hands proves DC police acted appropriately.

What you, and the editor-in-chief of this blog, are essentially asking the reader to consider is that 2 dc cops opened fire on a thief, mortally wounded him. Then, without any witnesses, they turned the gun around and shot into their car.
It is far easier to believe that someone picked up a gun from an unsecure crime scene.

There will be powder on the kid's hands and you will never hear about it because its not newsworthy.

I'm glad DCist posted this story and I think Mathis's "editorial" take on it is far from irresponsible. We should be questioning an incident like this when the gun the perpetrator supposedly used to shoot at the officers goes missing.

Not long ago I witnessed someone get arrested by DC police. The idiot was drunk, acting like a jackass and deserved to be arrested. But when the two cops jumped on him, threw him to the ground, and cuffed him, they also happened to cut his head pretty badly. When I was asked to fill out a report the cops suggested I write down that he hurt himself by "falling down." Again, the guy deserved to be arrested and sent to jail, but he did not get hurt by falling down. He got hurt because the cops threw him to ground. I'm not saying the police were wrong in using force the way they did, but it was alarming that I was asked to lie about happened. Made we wonder what else they lie about.

Exactly my point, #65. At this moment, the burden is on the cops to prove their side of the story.

It's no stretch to imagine that kid as unarmed and the cops shooting him
1) to prove a point to the neighborhood,
2) out of frustration,
3) just because they can, or
4) all of the above

I said "goof freakin' riddance" not about a 14 year old minibike thief, but rather a 14 year old who according to the story:

The teenager allegedly began shooting at the officers. One bullet hit the officer's car about a foot below the window. The officer whose bike was missing returned fire, Lanier said, shooting about eight rounds. One shot struck the youth in the head, killing him.

Sorry, I don't have much sympathy for folks who die in gun battles they themselves instigate. It is truly tragic that the Deonte Rawlings lost his life at such a young age. It also appears that Mr. Rawlings was chiefly responsible for that tragedy.

As has been noted above, the original DCist post insinuates that the cops saw the kid on the bike and gunned him down and are engaged in a cover up. Which is more believable that someone picked up Mr. Rawlings weapon in the confusion after he was shot or that a police officer murdered him, then cooked up a conspiracy with his fellow officer on the spot, then one of them shot the car they were riding in, then they called for called for back up. Oh and nobody saw anything.

Sexy Fitsum, in response to post 67, words can't describe how stupid you must be to post something like that. If you have that much contempt for those that protect us, how do you sleep at night?

Why does most every police-related "article" written by Sommer Mathis have an anti-police slant that's noto deserved? C'mon, dcist...be objective here. The headline and main dcist blurb are misleading.

Not only is there no gun, there's no bike, either.

Now that the Post has published an article with essentially the same focus as this piece (although admittedly with a somewhat less judgmental headline), can we at least acknowledge that there are some issues that need to be explored here?

Anonymous Idiot #76 - While I agree with the overwhelming majority of what you're saying here, riding a stolen mini-bike and drawing down on two cops does indeed qualify someone as a "thug".

The dismissive attitudes of many commenters here are nothing short of disgusting, but I learned long ago that the privileged sense of entitlement that these comments reflect isn't going anywhere.

in addition to putting a hot plate on the table, the street life appeals to children who lack the attention and support they deserve...a sense of belonging and family...sadly, escape from such a lifestyle proves impossible for many

Guest 76 wrote "The lack of opportunity, education, and love for D.C. youth becomes evident through daily tragedys. Many children receive little guidance and compassion while being forced towards the deadly street life. Knowing nothing but drugs and violence, imprisoned kids are robbed of the opportunity to succeed. "

What a pretentious load of horseshit, especially when you couple it with blaming those of us that don't contribute to the problem.

Kids in DC, even the very poorest, have free housing, free food, free education, and access to a stunningly strong job market. As do their parents.

As one that's been mugged at gunpoint by some of those same sweet youth you describe, your post is insulting. Average age of the little shits that mugged me? 15. And they lived for free, along with their parents, in DC Section 8 housing that my tax dollars provided. And they went to schools (or at least did at some point) in schools paid for with my money.

The conditions you describe exist. To some extent. But who is causing it? These very kids and their parents.

Some of us, including me, grew up in abject poverty. But we didn't shoot at the police, steal from people, mug people, etc.

So stop blaming the rest of us. You know, the ones paying for these little shits to roam the streets killing people.

As for 'get the fuck out of our neighborhoods', who exactly did you say was the racist here?

Last, show some gonads and sign your post. If you are going to fling hate, racism, and BS to that degree, sign your freaking post already.

Hillman, with all due respect, the "stunningly good job market" in DC is not nearly within the reach of the population you're talking about, nor is it really meant to be. It's targeted to out-of-towners with nice bachelors (and advanced) degrees who make up the professional middle class, like me. And while not everyone who comes from the working poor class gets involved in crime, many certainly do. You could stand down a little on the righteous indignation.

Everett:

That's not entirely true. I could go right now, with zero specific job experience, and get hired on at a dozen construction job sites. Within a year I could be in very high demand with any number of learned skills.

In fact, many construction projects in DC are required to hire a certain percentage of DC residents. If anything, these jobs are not for 'out of towners' - they are exclusively reserved for DC residents. These are EXACTLY the types of programs designed to help people out of poverty.

Yet far too often nobody shows up and actually works these jobs.

Beyond DC, you could easily get a construction job in any of the growing suburbs. Anybody been out near Manassas lately? It's construction projects as far as the eye can see. And they are literally begging for workers.

Would the job suck? Yes, certainly at first. But it's better than no job, and not even trying to get a job.

When I was poor and struggling in a much crappier economy, I did day labor. It sucked. But it gave me an entry into the construction field, which resulted in a real full time job. And that was in a much smaller town, with far fewer job prospects than the DC area has.

DC recently held a huge job fair, apparently for all skill levels. How many of these people showed up to take advantage of that?

DC has plenty of jobs for the 'underskilled'. Hell, look at most of our service industry. They are pretty much by definition 'underskilled' and/or 'undermotivated'.

And this isn't the 'working' poor class we're talking about, for the most part. I have the utmost respect for anyone that tries to better themselves. No. This is the 'refuse to work' poor class, by and large.

Back to the subject at hand. This kid was 14. The cops say he shot at cops (apparently they are now saying he actually shot at them before they could even get out of their car). IF this is true (and we don't know that for 100% certain yet, even though the evidence at hand certainly indicates that.... what with the officers car having a fresh bullet hole in it, and shells not from the officers guns found at the crime scene), then the kid was a punk, and I while I am sorry for the kid's parents, I don't lose any sleep over him losing his life. It makes me sad in the sense that the loss of any human life is sad, but I certainly don't feel it's my fault, and I'm glad that it was him that was killed and not the cops or bystanders. If anything, it's the fault of those that have been enabling and excusing this BS thug life and victim mentality for the past couple of decades. People like Guest 76 (if his comments on this thread today are any indication of how he actually contributes to society in DC).

In short, Guest 76 bears a shitload more responsibility for this type of situation than I ever will. So it's doubly pathetic that he (or she) is attacking the rest of us.

I'm not talking about this kid in particular. Of course I don't expect a 14 year old to be out full time job hunting. But neither do I expect him to be out shooting at people.

But I wouldn't be too sure about that 16 year old requirement. According to news reports this kid had a summer job with the DC government. You know, while he wasn't out on the streets with a gun.

You know nothing about my past or economic circumstance. So I'll fill you in briefly. I grew in in extreme rural poverty. Extreme. Like we didn't know where our next meal was coming from for months on end. Like we were picking wild crap to eat from the fields and woods. Like my parents actually allotted us 4 squares of toilet paper per kid, per day, because that's all they could afford.

So don't lecture me on poverty. By comparison to my upbringing, nearly all children in DC are upper class, economically speaking.

I do agree DC schools blow. But you don't even need a formal education to get a decent construction trade job. All you need is the willingness to work.

In DC you can get a job at 14. I worked for the libraries the summer after 9th grade and worked at a movie theater at 15.

Please stop posting lies without any research.

I'm sorry, I didn't work at the Cleveland Park Library when I was 14 and I didn't work at the Circle Avalon when I was 15? Gee Whiz, let me call my mother.

hold on...

Yes, she remembers me working at both places the summer after 9th grade and the summer after 10th, which was 14 and 15. In fact I worked for the Pedas Brothers until I started college.

these 2 officers did the same thing OJ and his boys did.so why arent they in jail posting bail money? If the 14 shot at them and they returned fire at him weres the gun? it should have been still near the scene. if the shots came from some where else why were they shooting at the 14 year? MPD needs to call a spaid a spaid if they want the people to support them and help them in unsolveed crimes.The street code of silence will continue just like police officers have a code of silence, code blue. if these officer are guilty of there ways and police protocal let it be known, o-yea and why did they leave the scene?

"abject poverty? one glance at anything you've said on this thread discredits remote possibility of a humble upbringing" -guest86

What the fuck does this mean? Defend this.

Hillman's responses on this board are always thoughtful, knowledgeable, and articulate. Oh yeah, and with blessed few spelling, capitalization, and grammatical errors. (And yeah, guest86, I'm talking to you here.) So you are saying that educated responses are only for the "elite"? That very idea is elitist and guest86 implies that poor people are too stupid to learn.

Jeez, this is a stupid comment.

Hillman: nice response to the "entitled" crap. I would have done the written version of ripping guest86's face off and I admire your restraint.

It's turning into an everyday "accidental" or "justified" incident. I thought that police wear bullet proof vests, I thought that police have bean bag guns and other non-lethal means of stopping someone. Why the hell cant they use them. They want to strick fear in the public, in the United States of America. Is this not the land of the free. The supposed "SuperPower" of the world cant be civil enough not to KILL THEIR OWN CHILDREN. THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE OUTRAGE. Any officer of the law that does kill a child should be fully and thoroughly investigated. From the sounds of this story the cops' house that got robbed was just out for vengence. This country is bent on killing though anyway, so what can I do! It's sickening to see all the inncocent lives lost for our very own greed.