Every hunter has experienced it—waiting patiently in extreme temperatures and consitions, joints stiff and sore from sitting motionless among the trees for so, so long. Then, like their counterparts on the island of Gwark who, out of the corner of their eyes, finally see it coming at a pace fit for a race. Why yes, there it is, the elusive, reclusive Fizza-ma-wizza-ma-dill, and it just topped Bill’s Hill.

So with hands steady and gun at ready, the hunter fires. Boom! But the creature scurries off into the jungle without even the slightest of bungles. And much to his dismay, all the poor hunter sees is the part of the Fizza-ma-wizza-ma-dill that generally last sees the light of day.

The hunter missed his target. But why did his shot go so far astray?

Well, in defense of the hunter, shooting a moving target is extremely difficult. And, for example, during a police shootout with a bad guy, it’s even more difficult to fire an accurate shot when the target is shooting back.

As a firearms instructor at the police academy I often taught combat shooting to officers, and part of that training included having the officers locate and aim for a target within their target. I know, that sounds a little odd, but all it means is to pinpoint a tiny spot on the intended target, and that’s the spot you want to hit when the trigger is pulled. Not just the body of the attacker who’s charging at you with a gun in each hand. This technique doesn’t mean the shooter will actually hit such a tiny spot, but it helps to narrow the focus which helps the officer make a far more accurate shot.

Think of the football quarterback who practices throwing a ball through the center of a tire. His overall target is the tire, but he wants to deliver the ball to the center of the tire/target. He does this for hours and hours, perfecting his technique, so that when he gets on the field he’ll be able to transfer that pinpoint accuracy to a receiver’s hands. Same principle when practicing the “target-on-target” combat shooting method.

The next trick to combat shooting is teaching the shooters to fire their weapons the moment their support hand comes in contact with their gun hand. It’s at this moment when the eyes should have already found their target on the target (a mustard stain on the bad guy’s shirt, a button, a logo, etc.). There should be absolutely no hesitation at this point. When the hands come together the trigger should be pulled. If the officers takes a fraction of a second to think, try to find the sights, glance to the side, etc., the shot will most likely be off target. It’s that simple.

My fellow instructors and I used to practice by shooting the thumbtacks that held our targets in place. Our peers used to tease us, saying we were obsessed with shooting. Some even equated us with…

But all the shooting must have paid off. I’m still here after an intense shootout with a bank robber.

It takes practice to become proficient with firearms. And, just like a basketball player practices free throws, so should police officers practice shooting their weapons. The big difference in the two (other than the pay) is that an officer’s life may come down to a single pull of the trigger.

It happens. You’re a detective who’s minding his own business and growing his hair out along with a scruffy beard in preparation for working an undercover assignment, when the boss calls to tell you to suit up for a special assignment. He needs warm bodies in uniform…as many as he can get, and fast.

So you (in this case, me) rush home and pull out the old Class A. It fits, barely. And I mean butt-seam-expanding barely. After all, it’s been years since I’d had it on. In fact, it had been so long ago that styes had changed and my fellow officers were currently wearing a different uniform entirely.

Next came the razor. The beard, after weeks of perfecting it to a drug-user-bad-guy appearance, had to go. But I had a moment of absolute “brilliance,” and decided to leave a sporty push-broom/porn-star mustache. Why? Who knows. Oh well, we do odd things when the pressure is on, right?

When I arrived back at my office, the chief took one look and said, “Your hair is too long. Get it off your ears. Can’t see them and I won’t have you looking like that in the morning papers, and they will be covering this one. And straighten those ribbons while you’re at it.”

There was no need to argue and no time for a haircut. So I, being such a creative genius already, did the next best thing—pushed my hair behind my ears and plopped one of those goofy cop/bus driver hats firmly onto my head to keep everything in place. All the while hoping I wouldn’t get into a scuffle where a bad guy knocks the hat from my head at the precise moment a reporter/photographer snaps a picture. That’s right, I was more worried about the hair-too-long news photo than a punch to the skull.

So…how well do you think I blended in with the rest of the guys—wacky mustache, razor burns on the cheek and neck (a few dots of dried blood as well), hair pushed back behind my ears forming what appeared to be a mullet of some sort, a bus driver hat that no one wore, and I mean no one, pants splitting at the seams across the rear end, and, well, you get the picture. I was NOT the prime candidate for a recruiting poster.

By the way, you’ll notice in the photo above that I wasn’t wearing a vest, and that’s because in my haste to get back to the PD I forgot to grab it from the closet before getting dressed. Actually, I was extremely lucky my shoes and socks matched, assuming they did.

Yeah, it happens, and it’s never pretty.

As is to be expected these days the media once again attempted to make something out of nothing, an attempt to pour even more fuel on the anti-cop flames. This time their hate-stirring weapon was a cheeseburger, and the headlines read something like this – Mere Hours After Killing Nine People Cops Treat White Suspect to Burger King Meal.

First of all, the police didn’t physically take the murderer to Burger King. Since their PD is not equipped to house and feed prisoners, an officer or detective picked up a burger and brought it back to the station where Roof was held in custody.

Roof had not been booked into a county or city jail where he would’ve received a meal (all prisoners must be fed), which is typically something quickly tossed together when a prisoner arrives after the normal meal times. One of those spur of the moment meals might consist of a cheese sandwich, an apple, and a juice box.

However, since Roof was not at a facility equipped for meal service, officers had to do the next best thing…take-out. It happens all the time. There’s nothing unusual about this “cheeseburger” event. Nothing at all.

Another example of fast food for prisoners is during long-distance transports that result from extraditions from one area to another. Officers routinely stop for burgers when making those trips and they sometimes feed their prisoners the same tasty cuisine unless, of course, the jail sends along a bag lunch. If, however, the trip lasts more than a day, well, it’s burger time.

Roof, though, was held at the station, in cuffs, while the officer went out for the food. Another reason this practice is not unusual is because by law police cannot deprive a suspect of food, water, and bathroom during intensive, hours-long interrogation/questioning. At the time Roof was held at the local police station, officers there were waiting for the FBI to assist with or take over the questioning and their prisoner, so the wait time was even longer than normal, and it was reported that Roof hadn’t eaten in quite a while. A couple of days even. Had the officers withheld food there’s a chance a defense attorney could’ve used that against the prosecution’s case, saying his client confessed because he was hungry and merely said what investigators wanted to hear in order to receive a meal.

Besides, food, drink, cigarettes, etc. are all used as tools by “good cops” when questioning suspects. It’s the officer playing the role of “bad cop” who might refuse to give the offender a smoke. I don’t smoke but used to keep a pack of cigarettes in my desk drawer in case a suspect asked for one during questioning. It’s an ice-breaking gesture that often loosens the tongue when nothing else seems to work. I’ve also purchased soft drinks and snack items for suspects during questioning. Doesn’t mean I liked doing it, but it’s a tool in the toolbox. And, if they’d been a while without a meal I saw to it they were fed. That’s just common decency.

Believe me, this meal for Roof was no cheeseburger in paradise.

Jurisdictional issues come up all the time for police officers. Criminals are extremely mobile and, unfortunately for local cops, they simply don’t stay put waiting for officers to come and get them.

Jurisdiction (according to Blacks Law Dictionary) is a geographic area in which a court has power or types of cases it has power to hear. For law enforcement officers, their jurisdictional boundary covers the area where they are sworn to protect and serve.

City officers are sworn (raise their right hands and repeat an oath) to protect and enforce the laws of the city where they’re employed. County officers are sworn to protect and enforce the laws of the counties where they’re employed (which also includes towns and cities located within the county). State officers are sworn to enforce laws in their state. And federal officers are sworn to enforce laws throughout the country.

In most cases, police officers aren’t allowed to make an arrest in any area that’s outside their jurisdiction. In fact, some arrests conducted outside an officer’s jurisdiction are considered illegal.

Unfortunately, bad guys aren’t held to such standards. They’ve even been known to kill somebody in Florida and flee all the way to Washington state. The nerve of those guys. They just don’t abide by the rules.

When bad guys do flee the scene of a crime officers issue warrants for their arrest, and they issue a BOLO (Be On The Lookout). Then, when the crooks are spotted in Washington state, the Northwestern cops can make a legal arrest based on the information—warrants on file/issued—they’ve received from the authorities in Florida.

Are there circumstances when officers are permitted to travel outside their home territory to apprehend a criminal? Yes, there are exceptions to the jurisdictional restrictions for police officers. Such as…

1) During a hot pursuit. Officers can legally pursue a fleeing felon across jurisdictional boundaries as long as they maintain visual contact with the suspect. However, if the officer ever loses sight of the suspect the pursuit is no longer considered fresh and they must terminate the chase (There are always exceptions. Remember, we’re talking about the law).

2) An officer can make a legal arrest outside his jurisdiction if she is responding to a request for assistance from another agency.

3) In some areas, as long as an officer has possession of a legal arrest warrant she can serve it on the suspect anywhere in her state. As always, check local laws and policy.

4) Many jurisdictions have a specified allowance of distance their officers may travel to make an arrest. This provision in place because there are no physical lines drawn on the ground to determine actual city limits. Officers acting in good faith may make an arrest within these provisional boundaries.

For example, the Commonwealth of Virginia.

§ 19.2-250. How far jurisdiction of corporate authorities extends.

A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article and except as provided in subsection B hereof, the jurisdiction of the corporate authorities of each town or city, in criminal cases involving offenses against the Commonwealth, shall extend within the Commonwealth one mile beyond the corporate limits of such town or city; except that such jurisdiction of the corporate authorities of towns situated in counties having a density of population in excess of 300 inhabitants per square mile, or in counties adjacent to cities having a population of 170,000 or more, shall extend for 300 yards beyond the corporate limits of such town or, in the case of the criminal jurisdiction of an adjacent county, for 300 yards within such town.

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, the jurisdiction of the authorities of Chesterfield County and Henrico County, in criminal cases involving offenses against the Commonwealth, shall extend one mile beyond the limits of such county into the City of Richmond.

However, in Limestone County, Alabama, this law is in effect:

In Limestone, no police jurisdiction of a municipality located wholly or partially within Limestone county shall extend beyond the corporate limits of the municipality. (Amendment 499; Proposed by Act 88-306, submitted at the Nov. 8, 1988, election, and proclaimed ratified Nov. 23, 1988, Proclamation Register No. 6, p. 56).

5) Officers may make a citizens arrest anywhere in the country, just like any other person in the same situation. And that’s exactly what Gomer did when Barney Fife made the illegal U-turn.

6) Interestingly, Ohio state patrol officers have no jurisdiction on private property. Their arrest powers cover only roadway patrol and state property. (Please correct me if I’m wrong, Lt. Swords).

Of course other exceptions to the jurisdictional boundary laws include when a life is in immediate jeopardy, during an act of war or terrorism, etc.

And, I feel compelled to answer the question I see asked almost every single day. Here goes.

NO, the FBI does not ride into town and take over cases from local police departments. They have other things to do—Spies, Terrorists, Hackers, Pedophiles, Mobsters, etc.

Besides, as a rule, the FBI doesn’t work murder cases. Local police departments, sheriffs offices, and state police are more than capable of handling their own cases, including kidnapping/abduction. And they do.

Many homicide investigations begin with little more to go on than the notion that someone died at the hands of another human.

Sometimes, though, all detectives have to go on is, well, a single body part, such as a human skull found in the woods among sticks and dried leaves.

The deceased could have met their end by an animal attack, a fall, suicide, natural causes, or … murder. Therefore, close examinations of the remains are crucial. And, after a closer look at the skull in the above two photos, we see something of definite interest—scrape marks consistent with the use of a tool with serrated edges, such as a steak knife.

Murder? How else would the blade of a steak knife contact bare human bone?

So what’s the next step for detectives? Where and how do they begin when all they have to go on is a skull?

Well, it’s important to know the name of the victim, if possible. Then it’s easier to develop a list of potential suspects.

So …

With no obvious source of DNA—blood, hair, body fluids, tissue, etc., the next place to search would be the root/pulp of the teeth, if any.

In this case, forensic investigators extracted the molars (the only teeth remaining in the jaw bone) and packaged them for delivery to a testing lab. And, since detectives were simultaneously working on a missing person case of suspicious nature, they obtained blood samples from the child of the missing person.

Officials sent the blood samples along with the teeth, hopeful that results would bring closure to both cases.

Unfortunately, due to exposure to harsh conditions and wildlife, no DNA was found in the teeth. The forensic anthropologist in charge, Dr. Elizabeth Murray, then decided to try a unique approach—take core samples of the skull.

Using a drill much like the one found in a homeowner’s workshop or garage, and a specially designed bit, they obtained six plugs/cores.

The cores were packaged in a sterile tube and sent to a Lab Corp facility for testing, and for another attempt to match the skull with the blood samples obtained from the child.

As is the case with all forensic testing requests, proper documentation was again submitted.

Extracting DNA from the core samples required a process where the bone material was first ground into a fine powder. Then the bone matrix was dissolved, which released the DNA. The procedure does not fully dissolve the bone matrix; therefore, not all DNA in the specimen is released. However, the process achieves excellent results from samples recovered even after several decades have passed.

This time, thanks to the persistence of investigators and a very savvy forensic anthropologist, the lab announced a positive match of the DNA found in the core samples and that found in the blood taken from the child. The murder victim and missing woman were the same.

Investigators could then begin their search for the killer. First up … the boyfriend and it wasn’t long before he was in prison serving a twenty-five-year sentence, which, by the way, ended in December 2023.