Full Scanner Audio of KPD Robbery Chase/Killing

This nearly 24 minute audio includes all the radio traffic the KPD scanner received between 10pm and Midnight on April 17th, 2012. It’s everything from the initial report from Diversified Computers of noise on the roof, to the shooting of the suspect on Marlboro St., to the manhunt for the other two suspects, to the afterwards.

The Keene police scanner audio reveals that the two suspects were taken into custody AFTER the police shot the third man to death. The Sentinel’s report makes it sound like the reverse happened:

At least one person was on the roof of the building when police arrived. He and another man were taken into custody after a short pursuit, authorities said.
A man who was not captured allegedly left the area in a car and led police on a pursuit to Marlboro Street.

Their mis-reporting led FK’s Ademo to write his opinion piece, in which he assumed the Sentinel got it right and therefore makes several mistaken conclusions. Remember, as you listen to this audio, the blank spaces have been mostly excised from the piece to make it easier to listen. In the full audio, it’s more than ten minutes before officer Jennifer Uhas (118) announces she has the first suspect in custody. Less than a minute later, the second suspect is in custody as well. In their report, the Sentinel claims to have their own scanner – so why the botched reporting?

The audio is pretty intense, and Keene police for the most part, do the best they can to bring aggressors to justice, backed by four state troopers, a couple of county sheriffs, and mutual aid units from Winchester, Dublin, and Troy. Sadly, some officers opted to use deadly force to stop the third suspect from running, which seems entirely inappropriate and even reckless, far beyond the recklessness of engaging in an unnecessary high-speed chase. Police should not use deadly force to stop someone unless that person is endangering life. Of course it’s wrong to break, enter, and steal, but killing and endangering the community with gunfire and high speeds is not the answer.

Details are scarce from the scene of the shooting at this time, but it looks like some Keene police officers killed a man who was merely fleeing and not threatening anyone directly. Speculating from the scanner audio, it could have been James Lamoureux (171) and Eli Rivera (75) who pulled the trigger. Of course, this presumes the Sentinel is correct in their claim that two officers shot at the fleeing suspect. As we’ve seen, you can’t count on them to get the story right. More as this develops.

Prediction based on how these things go in other communities: Both officers are put on paid leave while the case is investigated internally. Both officers are eventually exonerated of any wrongdoing, as the “fleeing felon” rule allows cops to shoot people in the back, even if they pose no imminent threat. At least, as I understand it. Perhaps Brad Jardis will tell us more. Stay tuned to Free Keene for the latest.

Listen to the KPD scanner feed here 24/7 and on your smart phone via the free TuneIn app. As you listen, you can figure out who is who by checking officer numbers here.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


48 Comments

  1. Listen all, this is how you decipher real life when STONED. Ian is making the police look bad. Even though cutting through a roof to STEAL (why else would they be there?, and Ian’s good at LOADED wording.)  Ian CLAIMS the audio was edited because of dead air radio traffic. In Reality, (and FREAKEENERS love REALITY TV), as usual, he edited out IMPORTANT radio communications. 
    I listened to it, (incidently the live feed doesn’t work anymore).. Anything that says VIOLENCE by the DUMBASSES that committed the crime is only done to say, ‘THERE WAS NO VIOLENCE”.  No one was a victim to a VIOLENT crime, until the shooting. Hence, “it’s okay to steal/break-in, as long as no one is hurt.
    Ian , where’s the video on this, or were you fecking off , trying to make yourself look good OUTSIDE Keene? Surely you were on the job just waiting to video record this so you could make  the police look bad.

  2. as typical of Ian he jumps to conclusions based off of his ill judgement of man.

  3. Ians state of mind ==> da hell with the victims of his theft and the possible victims that could have been run down, as long as the criminal is ok, Ian is just dandy. what fucking kind of peace is he advocating? peace among criminals? Jesus Christ.

  4. hey Ian, a fleeing felon is a dangerous felon. You want to put the people of Keene at risk because YOU assume he’s peaceful? Only a dangerously biased fool would jump to such conclusions.

  5. So in Ians world…its ok to murder a cop when he tries to serve you a warrant…but when a dangerous fleeing felon gets killed…its a tragedy? Wow…

  6. So in Ians world…its ok to murder a cop when he tries to serve you a warrant…but when a dangerous fleeing felon gets killed…its a tragedy? Wow…

  7.  jessi you are  all over the idea that shooting this guy is just FINE and great ………..and YOU are lacking facts…id say you’re talk is rather dangerous and irresponsible to put it LIGHTLY

  8. jessi you are  all over the idea that shooting and killing this guy is just FINE and great ………..and YOU are lacking facts…id say your talk is rather dangerous and irresponsible to put it LIGHTLY

  9.  last i checked thy dont give a death sentence for b+e

  10. last i checked they don’t give a death sentence for b+e

  11. really, how is it lacking facts?

  12. the kind of peace with the people and cops dont  think its ok to be judge jury and executioner-as you do-…… and think thats just fine WITHOUT ALL THE FACTS…also the kind of peace  were the public servants can be scrutinized and held to account….but i guess that is VERBOTEN in YOUR world 🙂

  13. the kind of peace with the people and cops dont  think its ok to be judge jury and executioner-as you do-…… and think thats just fine WITHOUT ALL THE FACTS…also the kind of peace  were the public servants can be scrutinized and held to account….but i guess that is VERBOTEN in YOUR world 🙂

  14. but for attempted vehicular manslaughter you can be given a death sentence right in the spot 🙂

  15. Right? I thought Ian was against double standards, but unfortunately I’m wrong.

  16. “Police should not use deadly force to stop someone unless that person is endangering life”

    So you don’t think the incredibly reckless driving this clearly criminal man was conducting was endangering anyone’s lives? He was not ‘merely fleeing’, Ian, he was fleeing the scene of a serious crime, the officers had no idea if he had any dangerous weapons in his car, AND he was driving recklessly, clearly with a disregard for others who might be in the area–a residential area no less.

    You berate the Sentinel for ‘botched reporting’ (which is debatable depending on your reading of the story) and yet you can’t muster up the courage to do some honest reporting yourself? If you think the man in the car was not presenting a threat to others you are obviously so entrenched in your own slanted views it is going to be impossible for you to ever climb your way out.

  17. “Police should not use deadly force to stop someone unless that person is endangering life”

    So you don’t think the incredibly reckless driving this clearly criminal man was conducting was endangering anyone’s lives? He was not ‘merely fleeing’, Ian, he was fleeing the scene of a serious crime, the officers had no idea if he had any dangerous weapons in his car, AND he was driving recklessly, clearly with a disregard for others who might be in the area–a residential area no less.

    You berate the Sentinel for ‘botched reporting’ (which is debatable depending on your reading of the story) and yet you can’t muster up the courage to do some honest reporting yourself? If you think the man in the car was not presenting a threat to others you are obviously so entrenched in your own slanted views it is going to be impossible for you to ever climb your way out.

  18. here it is seeing as you seem to have no clue :there is a difference between a car COMING AT YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE and a  car HEADING AWAY in a direction where no  one is in imminent danger.   In one instance  you are stopping a person  because someone is in imminent danger in the other you are not..  I believe LAW backs that up .     And that is what the police have yet to tell us. You can’t just SHOOT AND KILL someone because they may wind up crashing into someone at some point.lol

  19. here it is seeing as you seem to have no clue :there is a difference between a car COMING AT YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE and a  car HEADING AWAY in a direction where no  one is in imminent danger.   In one instance  you are stopping a person  because someone is in imminent danger in the other you are not..  I believe LAW backs that up .     And that is what the police have yet to tell us. You can’t just SHOOT AND KILL someone because they may wind up crashing into someone at some point.lol

  20. yes…It has yet to be determined that that  attempted  etc was the case; there is were we ALL need more facts

  21. yes…It has yet to be determined that that  attempted  etc was the case; there is were we ALL need more facts

  22. David, you said, “there is a difference between a car COMING AT YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE and a  car HEADING AWAY in a direction where no  one is in imminent danger.” 
    unless the perp is on the shore and flees for the sea your right. but this wasn’t the case.

    you also said: “You can’t just SHOOT AND KILL someone because they may wind up crashing into someone at some point.”

    if they are proving to be a danger to someone, using bad judgement, and are fleeing from a crime before hand… yeah you can. Again I am referring to previous instances of criminal fleeing and the results and human instinct.

  23.  I thought it was burglary? Do you suggest the nonviolent act of burglary is a serious crime?  Because every time I have been the victim of burglary the cops could give 2 shits about the “serious” crime perpetrated against me.  I am glad the two were caught, I am not glad the third man is dead.  I am not glad innocent road users were put in danger by the interactions between police and the third criminal. 

  24.  I thought it was burglary? Do you suggest the nonviolent act of burglary is a serious crime?  Because every time I have been the victim of burglary the cops could give 2 shits about the “serious” crime perpetrated against me.  I am glad the two were caught, I am not glad the third man is dead.  I am not glad innocent road users were put in danger by the interactions between police and the third criminal. 

  25. Do you suggest that burglary is NOT a serious crime? Do you suggest cutting a hole in the roof of a private business and stealing their property should NOT be taken seriously just because you claim cops didn’t care when something was stolen from you? What kind of twisted logic is that?

    I am glad the two were caught as well, and I am also not glad the third was shot. But that doesn’t mean I will foolishly claim that he was not endangering life, as Ian has, because it simply is not true.

  26. Do you suggest that burglary is NOT a serious crime? Do you suggest cutting a hole in the roof of a private business and stealing their property should NOT be taken seriously just because you claim cops didn’t care when something was stolen from you? What kind of twisted logic is that?

    I am glad the two were caught as well, and I am also not glad the third was shot. But that doesn’t mean I will foolishly claim that he was not endangering life, as Ian has, because it simply is not true.

  27. just because something is nonviolent does not mean it is nonserious.

  28. just because something is nonviolent does not mean it is nonserious.

  29. When I was a victim the crime of burglary the crime was treated by the police officers as insignificant.  I do not have a lot of experience in being a criminal nor a victim.  Classifying different criminal activities is not something I spend a lot of time contemplating.  By the way the “professionals”  acted, the people who do have plenty of experience in these matters, I understood their actions to mean the crime against me was not serious.  I may be wrong and this criminal act may be serious, but what I do know is the interaction of a high speed chase on public roads endangered other humans.  The escalation to the high speed chase was far more serious than the original crime. 

  30. When I was a victim the crime of burglary the crime was treated by the police officers as insignificant.  I do not have a lot of experience in being a criminal nor a victim.  Classifying different criminal activities is not something I spend a lot of time contemplating.  By the way the “professionals”  acted, the people who do have plenty of experience in these matters, I understood their actions to mean the crime against me was not serious.  I may be wrong and this criminal act may be serious, but what I do know is the interaction of a high speed chase on public roads endangered other humans.  The escalation to the high speed chase was far more serious than the original crime. 

  31. “When I was a victim the crime of burglary the crime was treated by the police officers as insignificant.”

    And were you happy with that result? Would you have rathered they took it seriously?
    Additionally, if the experiences you are talking about did not involved three men trying to cut a hole in your roof, then the comparison is not really direct…regardless, my original questions remain.

    “The escalation to the high speed chase was far more serious than the original crime.”

    First of all, you have no way of judging that because the men were chased off before they successfully committed the crime they were trying to commit, so you have no idea how dangerous it might have turned out to be–judging by their displayed behavior they were not the type to commit ‘nice robberies.’

    Secondly, if you agree that the chase was dangerous, then you must agree that the police were justified in using force to apprehend the people who provoked the chase–aka, the 3 men in question. Or do you propose that robbers should not be persued once they reach a certain speed?

  32. “When I was a victim the crime of burglary the crime was treated by the police officers as insignificant.”

    And were you happy with that result? Would you have rathered they took it seriously?
    Additionally, if the experiences you are talking about did not involved three men trying to cut a hole in your roof, then the comparison is not really direct…regardless, my original questions remain.

    “The escalation to the high speed chase was far more serious than the original crime.”

    First of all, you have no way of judging that because the men were chased off before they successfully committed the crime they were trying to commit, so you have no idea how dangerous it might have turned out to be–judging by their displayed behavior they were not the type to commit ‘nice robberies.’

    Secondly, if you agree that the chase was dangerous, then you must agree that the police were justified in using force to apprehend the people who provoked the chase–aka, the 3 men in question. Or do you propose that robbers should not be persued once they reach a certain speed?

  33. I am against the use of violence, so you must be confusing me with some other person.

  34. I am against the use of violence, so you must be confusing me with some other person.

  35. But in some cases you agree that it is justified as a last resort, do you not? You seemed to say that the man who shot the officer who broke into his house was justified in doing so, what is it about this most recent case that makes violence as a last resort unjustified?

  36. But in some cases you agree that it is justified as a last resort, do you not? You seemed to say that the man who shot the officer who broke into his house was justified in doing so, what is it about this most recent case that makes violence as a last resort unjustified?

  37. I didn’t say that man was justified in killing the cop.  I’m against the use of violence against the people calling themselves “the state”.

    This situation was not a “last resort”.  Killing is not necessary if the criminal is not threatening anyone.

  38. I didn’t say that man was justified in killing the cop.  I’m against the use of violence against the people calling themselves “the state”.

    This situation was not a “last resort”.  Killing is not necessary if the criminal is not threatening anyone.

  39. So you DON’T think the previous scenario was justified?

    And as for this situation, how is driving recklessly through an unsuspecting neighborhood after having just attempted to rob and vandalize private property not threatening behavior?

  40. So you DON’T think the previous scenario was justified?

    And as for this situation, how is driving recklessly through an unsuspecting neighborhood after having just attempted to rob and vandalize private property not threatening behavior?

  41.  this is the other  http://www.wmur.com/video/30912247/detail.html
       
      I’m still not saying it was right.I’m just saying  they could justify it; keeping a bit more integrity
        It seems like the sequence was ..high speed chase -crash – tries to run – tries to get back in car…..yelled at by coppers to Freeze (or the equivalent) – he didnt  ..then the shots…

  42. here are two videos with at the scene witnesses ..I’m gathering from these two videos that it MAY have been a justifiable shooting heres one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_QhMs_7YtE

    this is the other http://www.wmur.com/video/30912247/detail.html

    I’m still not saying it was right.I’m just saying they could justify it; keeping a bit more integrity
    It seems like the sequence was ..high speed chase -crash – tries to run – tries to get back in car…..yelled at by coppers to Freeze (or the equivalent) – he didnt ..then the shots… I am presuming that the “freeze” portion of the sequence had guns drawn. I could be wrong about that ;that is a presumption

  43.  also It seems  eli rivera and  the other guy was the police at the scene  the two there

  44. Also ,It seems  eli rivera and  James Lamoureux were the police at the scene : The two there .
    If the sequence is correct, than the man was trying to get back in the car after being told to freeze, -or the equivalent- maybe he did need to be stopped seeing as he proved to be a menace drivingwise…Hmm…
    It could be argued that they should have “talked him down” some more before shooting. But it seems like maybe he didnt “freeze” after proving to be a dangerous person.
    So maybe they were right to do what they did,because if he was getting back into the car after driving the way that he did,than he needed to be stopped.
    And they did have SOME words before shooting ;a warning of sorts,as told by the witnesses in the video

  45. edit

  46. edit

  47. Did you not hear that the fleeing suspect almost wiped out a motorist on Rt. 101 while in the oncoming lane and at high speed?

    This was a VERY dangerous and reckless person before he crashed, and evern more so after her got back into his vehicle and attempted to continue what could have been  a death sentence for a police officer, a motorist,  or anybody in this person’s way.

    Instead of treating the police and court system as your enemy, Free Keene should realize they are in place to protect the public, (which includes Free Keeners)  from the likes of Mr. De Jesus.

    What if this maniac killed you or someone close to you?  You’d be singing a far different tune.

    R2D2.

  48. Did you not hear that the fleeing suspect almost wiped out a motorist on Rt. 101 while in the oncoming lane and at high speed?

    This was a VERY dangerous and reckless person before he crashed, and evern more so after her got back into his vehicle and attempted to continue what could have been  a death sentence for a police officer, a motorist,  or anybody in this person’s way.

    Instead of treating the police and court system as your enemy, Free Keene should realize they are in place to protect the public, (which includes Free Keeners)  from the likes of Mr. De Jesus.

    What if this maniac killed you or someone close to you?  You’d be singing a far different tune.

    R2D2.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Quote From Member of MassCops.com Regarding Officer Involved Homicide - Free Keene - [...] LEO’s regarding police brutality, here’s what one had to say about last Tuesday’s cops and robbers chase here in…
  2. Quote From Member of MassCops.com Regarding Officer Involved Homicide | GrassrootsHeadlines.com - [...] LEO’s regarding police brutality, here’s what one had to say about last Tuesday’s cops and robbers chase here in…

Care to comment?