Years before sheriff’s deputy Sean Grayson gunned down Sonya Massey in her own home, he had been discharged from the Army for serious misconduct and had a history of driving under the influence, records show.

He also failed to obey a command while working for another sheriff’s office in Illinois and was told he needed “high stress decision making classes,” the agency’s documents reveal.

Grayson, who was a Sangamon County sheriff’s deputy before he was fired and charged with murder, responded to a report of a prowler at Massey’s home July 6. Bodycam footage from another deputy showed Massey saying she rebuked Grayson, and Grayson responded by threatening the 36-year-old. The exchange ended with Grayson shooting Massey and failing to render aid.

  • @HeyJoe
    link
    145 months ago

    The video is awful… 1000 other outcomes could have existed here that didn’t involve killing her for no reason. One of the articles attached to the link explains each bad decision made and even how he showed zero lack of remorse. It’s insane that they would tell her to take care of the pot of boiling water only to then use that as the excuse to consider her a threat when they could have easily done this themselves if they were so worried. They also could have just backed away if it was really so concerning to them as well. They also shot her in the head? If you have to shoot someone, is there even an attempt at all anymore to just shoot them in non vital areas so they can be apprehended, or is the outcome supposed to be shoot to kill? Aiming for the head doesn’t sound right for almost all situations.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      125 months ago

      He had to approach her to shoot her. Sonya ducked behind a counter when the officer pulled his gun on her and said “I will fucking shoot you in your fucking face”. Why would someone approach a threat? He didn’t see her as a threat, he saw an excuse to kill her.

      is there even an attempt at all anymore to just shoot them in non vital areas so they can be apprehended, or is the outcome supposed to be shoot to kill?

      It’s always shoot to kill, as it should be. A gun is a lethal weapon. It’s only use is to kill. Police have less-than-lethal tools if their intent isn’t to kill.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        He didn’t see her as a threat, he saw an excuse to kill her.

        I come away with this thought often in situations like this.

        Too many cops seem to look for how much force they get to use instead of how much they need to use.