The Ballad of Woody:
A tale of Seven Bullets and a Dead Man In Brattleboro
Robert Woodward (1964- 2001)
executed in Brattleboro, Vermont at the
All Souls Church
Prelude
When a man dies, does his truth die with him?
What truth did Robert Woodward offer us?
When shameful deeds are done in our name:
are we responsible to make amends?
What is our shame as citizens in the death
Of Robert
Woodward?
His killers, Terrance Parker and Marshall Holbrook:
When will
they atone for murder?
1.
Most times our boys do fine
Walking that thin blue line.
Swagger, strut, cocky walk.
Most of the time, it just talk.
Except one December morn’
The peace shredded ‘n torn.
A call from All Souls Church said,
Guy in the church with a knife
threatening to kill himself.
Send over a plain clothes cop.
He says, The government
is out to get him!
2.
Strange cat, this Woodward guy.
Robert, always asking, “why?”
Believed in kindness and love;
and in the grace of angels above.
Lived by the virtues of simplicity.
His life was about care & charity.
Hurt no one helped everyone.
A true friend and a good son.
What failed on December morn’?
From the blood, what truth born?
3.
Woody drove his car to church
and sanctuary left in the lurch.
What possessed him that day?
Why choose this as a final play?
Mumbling with tears and pain.
His blood would be our stain.
Quaking! Pen knife in hand.
Many in fear of his demands.
Please save me!
Give me sanctuary!
Please, help me.”
But why, why was he in fear?
Did he know death was near?
Don’t call the cops, they’ll kill me!
Woody pleaded.
A few brave souls rose to aid,
Italia & others helped & stayed.
Woody quietly put his knife away,
in gratitude others began to pray.
The Angel of Death stepped back,
and shed his robes to easily relax.
Suddenly, our boys in blue bust in.
and all hell about to be resoundin’!
4.
With their conclusions forgone
3 cops stormed in, guns drawn.
Woody freaked out at the guns,
but he knew that he was the one.
He took his penknife out again
held it to his tearing eye and said,
If you come near me, I’ll kill myself.
Scenes of a murder much disputed
but this ballad cannot be refuted.
Woody was trembling with fear,
as he knew the end was so near.
Drop the knife! shouted the cop.
Some say it was a distance of 12 feet,
others say the killing was at 10 feet.
Readers, let’s consider this scene:
Scared man, maybe even manic,
holding a pen knife to his eye
threatening to kill only himself.
Would you have calmed him down
or would you haven shot him dead?
Holbrook and Parker six bullets they shot,
third cop’s temper wasn’t boiling so hot,
he holstered his gun, but the damage done.
Woody fell bleeding and just about gone —
for a sure killin’ they shot him once more
while still bleeding to death on the floor
handcuffed like a beaten dog on a chain.
Would heaven cry at this shame and pain?
A doc on hand to staunch the bleeding,
We can save this man! Please.
Cops refused and ignored her pleadings.
Get away, he’s too dangerous!
Woodward’s pitifull last words were,
I’m sorry. I’m sorry.
Death should end a ballad, but not this one;
as the web of lies and deceits soon spun.
5.
Sorrel, Davis, even Governor Dean
dismissed clues at the crime scene
that said our cops shot too quick,
forget the mace or even billy-stick,
fast to hide behind a web of lies,
truth dressed in shameful disguise.
Chief Martin quick to say,
Cops acted right!
Truth hidden further from sight.
Eyewitnesses account all agree
Woody’s fear was plain to see
but Polly Wilson said,
He never threatened anyone but himself.
Norman Hunt,
He was only asking for help.
In short, our cops got off scot-free
and Holbrook headed south to flee.
Never a trial or honor restored,
scales of justices were ignored
Parker on payroll carrying a gun,
from moral judgment he can’t run
Recently reported to have said,
I love to shoot guns.
4.
When a man dies, does his truth die with him?
What truth did Robert Woodward offer us?
You neglected to mention that
You neglected to mention that “Woody” had 20 times the therapeutic level of Pseudoephedrine (articficial ephedrine) in his blood and was probably as high as a kite on speed
A poem or a polemic?
This piece of writing is meant as an indictment, meant to inflame passions.
It is obvious that the police chief pronounced the killing as justified before there is any possibility that he would have had a chance for an honest investigation with a conclusion based on an objective consideration of relevant evidence. Attorney General Sorrell’s report was transparently a cover-up, which inexplicably excluded certain eye witness reports that were at variance with Sorrell’s conclusions.
My objection to the “poem,” is that it assumes to know what the police thought and felt, ignoring any possibility that there may to have been more to their human feelings than that they were simply brutal murderers.
I do not know enough about
“that said our cops shot too quick, forget the mace or even billy-stick,”
I do not know enough about the story to have an opinion on whether negotiation/de-escalation was insufficiently employed.
But, theres one thing I will correct about this “poem” with certainty.
You do not go hands-on with someone wielding a knife without coming out bleeding.
I would never expect a police officer to go hands-on with someone with a knife. I wouldn’t myself. I personally wouldn’t even try a tazer unless I had someone next to me with a gun ready to drop the person if my tazer fails and the person charges. If my tazer failed, the time it would take me to drop it and draw my gun would take longer than the time it takes the knife wielder to close the 10 foot distance between us.
That the person was mentally ill and drugged up beyond the point of feeling pain only reinforces the insanity of that line of thinking.
I think very little attention should be paid to the armchair generalship of those who likely have never had to restrain someone who doesn’t want to be restrained, let alone one armed with a deadly weapon.
Those who think otherwise are welcome to visit my martial arts classes and I will hand you a rubber knife and I will sic 10 students on you and odds are, no matter who you are, you’ll take out at least half of them before being taken down.
Cops should de-escalate if possible FIRST, but hesitation costs lives. I don’t like it when cops rush in guns blazing unnecessarily, but rushing into an unknown situation, having to make split second decisions on insufficient information where hesitation can costs lives is not an enviable position to be in.
I’ll call a cop a murderer if I see em fire unnecessarily, but I certainly don’t expect them to take casualties wrestling with a mentally ill, drugged up person with a knife.
I would hope firing shots was the absolute last resort (sometimes the last resort is reached in mere seconds), but I would much prefer to have the person with holes in em be the person who decided to grab a knife and head to a public place, rather than a bystander or cop. Actions have consequences.
The causes of this man’s death likely took place long before he ever pocketed a knife and entered the church.
There is also absolutely
There is also absolutely nothing wrong with a police officer, or anyone saying “I love to shoot guns”.
Nothing. At. All.
Because “I love to shoot guns” does not mean “I love to kill people”.
Shame on you for making that implication.
Training
It’s a matter of training.
Police Officers are trained to shoot to stop a threat.
Unless the suspect is capable of exerting force at a distance (e.g. a gun), non- lethal force is preferable.
Three Cops, three guns, two kneecaps.
Woody didn’t have to die.
Within 20 feet, a knife is
Within 20 feet, a knife is rightfully considered an imminent threat. The time it takes for someone to close that distance is too short to allow non-lethal options to be reliably employed.
Try it, time the amount of time it takes for someone to lunge 10, 15 and 20 feet. Take a handgun to the range and see how many aimed shots you can get off in that amount of time. Now set up a moving target to simulate the attacker’s leg. Now see if you can score at least one hit on that leg sufficient to drop the person before they could reach you with that knife. If lots of drugs are involved, you need to do enough damage that the limb physically cannot function. You are probably armed with a 9mm. Good luck with that.
Now imagine adding panic, adrenaline, confusion, etc.. into the situation.
Now take your performance there and ask yourself if you are willing to bet your life and the life of bystanders on your odds.
Yeah. What you suggest is ridiculous.
Firing to wound is exceptionally difficult in reality. Panic, adrenaline and a fast-moving limb on a moving target…. The odds of a disabling hit are very, very low. Police, while they have far more training in firearms than the average person, actually don’t have that much firearm training in the scheme of things. Asking them to kneecap a charging knife-wielding attacker in close proximity is asking the impossible and unreasonable. I’d rather the cop shoot the knife-wielding, drugged up attacker than risk getting stabbed. Because in the likelihood that they miss, and the possibility that the attacker is so high on drugs they don’t get stopped by a small caliber pistol round anyway, then the knife wielding attacker has obtained a gun and has just tried to kill/killed a cop. Nothing for them to lose after that, really.
The time it took to fire several missed shots (and even if you hit them, they may not go down, drugs and all) just allowed them to close the distance. You don’t get to go home to your family now.
I doubt you have much experience with firearms if you think thats a reasonable tactic.
You simply don’t know what you are talking about.
Well put. Police are trained
Well put. Police are trained to use deadly force when necessary. That means aiming at the body mass. They are not trained to shoot people in the leg or to shoot a weapon out of someone’s hand. Only the Lone Ranger does this.
Failure to provide a means to afford a basic human right
At first I ignored this. I was unfamiliar with the episode and I would have preferred a prosaic straightforward report. Then for some reason, I read the first comment. I waited until the most recent comment today before I actually read the “ballad” itself.
I read the ballad twice. My comment is now based solely on the ballad, the comments that followed and my opinion of the events. Here goes.
Pseudoephedrine is nasal decongestant that is “sometimes abused, or used for non-medical purposes, because of its stimulant effects – it can give an excitable, hyperactive feeling and increase heart rate and blood pressure.”
However, unless forensics identified it was made into meth (speed) the comment that Woody was “probably as high as a kite on speed” is unsubstantiated.
The issue of, as stated above, whether the officers possessed, “more to their human feelings than that they were simply brutal murderers” is unknown to us, as the officers were not brought to testify in a court. Their feelings, then cannot be ascertained, when you take into account, as stated above, the “police chief pronounced the killing as justified before there is any possibility that he would have had a chance for an honest investigation with a conclusion based on an objective consideration of relevant evidence. Attorney General Sorrell’s report was transparently a cover-up, which inexplicably excluded certain eye witness reports that were at variance with Sorrell’s conclusions.”
In this case, feelings of the three officers are secondary to the quick pronouncement “the killing as justified.” Therefore, any possible unjustifiable actions (not premeditated murder) by the officers, for any other reason, cannot come to light. (The notion that an officer, who “headed south” is indeed, indicative of strong feelings, but not necessarily for good cause.)
It should also be noted that if the police entered with guns or guns drawn there was no “hands-on with someone wielding a knife” confrontation. It was guns-on with someone wielding a knife.
Moreover, the police could not have known that the man with the knife was a “drugged up person.” The fact that he held the knife to his own eye suggests that he had mental health issues. When he was told to drop the knife, he had it pointed to his own eye, he was not threatening and holding anyone hostage. The people in the church apparently got to him to pocket the knife, which he took out again when the police entered with guns drawn.
Since the police are “…trained to use deadly force when necessary. That means aiming at the body mass” the question here is, was there enough time to pause, beyond the order to drop the knife he was pointing at his own eye, once the officers took aim at Woody?
Is the failure to drop the knife on command, as the person had it pointed to his own eye, a “trained” episode where the police are taught to fire, in this case with seven bullets?
How close is that a match to any other form of summary execution?
It is that “pause” when three guns are pointed to an individual without “firepower” the moment when training could have been taught to the officers to not pull the trigger without an escalation involving threatening other people with knife?
(This comment is not applicable to police facing imminent gun fire.)
When it comes to the safety from harm, our officers need to be protected as much as anyone in the community. If it’s true that police are “trained to use deadly force when necessary. That means aiming at the body mass,” then it is imperative that we need a training program specifically designed to avoid “deadly force,” and that “body mass” as a target, in the absence of confirmed firepower, needs the same protection from harm as our officers.
The question was asked “When a man dies, does his truth die with him?” Did police training fail to provide a means to afford a basic human right for Woody in a court of law or a mental health evaluation?
You guys aren't getting
You guys aren’t getting it.
First off, where are you getting this idea that pseudo needs to be made into meth before it has significant effects? You might want to check the credentials of the fellow you are disagreeing with, there. I’d wager he knows a fair bit more about the subject than both of us put together.
You are right, the police could not have known that the fellow with the knife was drugged up. They also can’t know if the person *isn’t* drugged up. All they know is they’ve got someone behaving, shall we say, abnormally.
Making the assumption that the person is not drugged up and attempting to wound them or going hands on risks the person not feeling a damned thing and closing within knife range in the time it has taken to discover that.
Then its too late.
So he had the knife pointed at himself. Ok, so if he moves towards one of the bystanders, do we ask the police to wait for the split second when he takes the knife away from himself and points it towards the bystander? Now theres a good chance you can’t even fire because you’ll hit the bystanders. That means hesitation probably caused casualties.
He’d also made statements that he preferred to be killed than captured alive. Think about that. Also think about the apparent anti-government and paranoid statements he was making. That the congregants had “calmed him down” needs to be taken in context with those statements and his reaction to the arrival of people in uniform.
Heres the simple version:
If the fellow was a significant distance away from both the police and any bystanders and was only threatening himself, then negotiation/de-escalation is the order of the day. Keep in mind anything closer than 20 feet or so, that knife is just about as lethal as a gun, due to the speed at which that distance can be closed.
So, the *instant* the fellow moves towards the police or bystanders and that 20 foot distance is breached, its time to unload your magazine, center mass. Stop the threat, period.
-If you try to mace them, it may not work and they’ll close the distance and kill you.
– If you try to go hands-on with clubs, theres a good chance they’ll kill you. No way to know how drugged up they are, good chance they are feeling no pain. Our officers are not trained nor should they expected to be gladiators.
– If you try to taze them first, theres a chance it won’t work and they’ll close the distance and kill you.
– If you try to shoot them in the leg, good chance you’ll miss, good chance it won’t stop em anyway (drugs again) and they’ll close the distance and kill you.
So, its simple, the instant “Woody” breached that 20 foot zone of the cops or any bystanders, they should have shot him until he stopped being a threat.
End of story.
Hesitation causes casualties. In that situation it was preferable for “Woody” to die than to risk a bystander or officer being harmed.
Its cold, hard, reality. Thats just the way it is. Second-guessing and analyzing the situation to a degree is good, it makes sure that cops don’t fire prematurely, but the sense I am getting is that people were traumatized by what they saw and are desperately looking for any thin, unrealistic, unreasonable and uninformed justification for this to have gone a different way.
Could the situation have been handled such that he was “secured” and medical aid rendered sooner? Possibly. If so, should that have happened? Certainly.
Could the police have entered differently? Probably not, not without more information about what was going on inside. I’d wager that they entered appropriately given their information was probably along the lines of “Crazy person threatening a church full of people with a knife”.
Could more and better information have been conveyed prior to their entry? Maybe. I imagine that was looked at in some detail in terms of info provided by the caller to the dispatcher, and then the dispatcher to the officers.
None of that changes the fact that if he had a knife and made any move towards the officers or bystandars within a certain range, he needed to be shot until he stopped being a threat.
Woody killed himself the moment he pulled a knife on a group of people and didn’t drop it the instant guns were pointed at him. He killed himself. Suicide by cop.
“He killed himself. Suicide by cop.”
“First off, where are you getting this idea that pseudo needs to be made into meth before it has significant effects?”
If you read what I said you’ll find from me where I state a quote from a medical site, that “pseudo,” is “sometimes abused, or used for non-medical purposes, because of its stimulant effects – it can give an excitable, hyperactive feeling and increase heart rate and blood pressure.”
“…check the credentials of the fellow you are disagreeing with.”
For a long time now, Dr. Fagelson is one of our community commentators I make it a point to read anything he writes, (as I now do with you). However, I stand by my statement that “unless forensics identified it was made into meth (speed) the comment that Woody was “probably as high as a kite on speed” is unsubstantiated.
“Woody killed himself the moment he pulled a knife on a group of people.”
It’s my understanding that Woody pulled a knife on himself, not a group of people. Some of those same people talked him into pocketing the knife.
A “knife is just about as lethal as a gun, due to the speed at which that distance can be closed.”
I agree, even though it was a pocket penknife.
“So, its simple, the instant “Woody” breached that 20 foot zone of the cops or any bystanders, they should have shot him until he stopped being a threat.”
It’s also true that witnesses disagreed what happen. It is unknown to me that Woody “breached that 20 foot zone.”
“People were traumatized by what they saw and are desperately looking for any thin, unrealistic, unreasonable and uninformed justification for this to have gone a different way.”
Maybe so, but as you wrap up you comment, following your, “End of story,”you do pretty much the same thing, whether not you are uninformed as well, I agree with you, as usual, with much of what you say and your analysis is quite good.
But with witnesses in disagreement, and the other points involved, my final question stands, Did -police training- fail to provide a means to afford a basic human right for Woody in a court of law or a mental health evaluation?
Has anyone ever considered
Has anyone ever considered that Woody may have committed suicide by cop?
In a hail of bullets
eschmitt in his comment from 1:36pm suggested that Woody “may have” committed suicide by cop.
Woody must have known that someone would “call the cops” and that he failed to drop the penknife, knowing he’d go down in a hail of bullets.
The question of justifying the shooting or the the lack of justifications, is not dispelled by questions raised described as “that people were traumatized by what they saw and are desperately looking for any thin, unrealistic, unreasonable and uninformed justification for this to have gone a different way,” except when,
“…one December morn’
The peace shredded ‘n torn.”
Unarmed police
I wonder how the British police would have handled this situation.
They can be brutal. I witnessed a couple of London “Bobbies” mercilessly beating a downed man with their Billy Clubs.
(I suspect the man survived the beating).