The North Hollywood Shootout

The North Hollywood Shootout

Introduction

Over the years, the relations between the police and media have been characterized as being contentious, especially during critical incidents. It seems that the media have little confidence in how law enforcement responds and manage critical events. On the other hand, law enforcement also seems dissatisfied with the information that the media conveys to the public regarding critical incidents. The North Hollywood shootout is a historical-critical incident that occurred in the United States that reveals why it is essential for law enforcement agencies to respond to the concerns and questions of the media during and after a critical incident. The historical event involved a gunfire exchange between two bank robbers and the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) that led to the death of the robbers and injury to several officers involved in the incident. However, analysis of the event and how the LAPD dealt with the media reveals more could be done by the agency to ensure that a better job was done.

The North Hollywood Shootout

The North Hollywood Shootout occurred on Friday, February 28, 1997, at the Bank of America in North Hollywood. According to reports, two violent bank robbers, Larry Eugene Philips and Emil Dechebal Matasareanu, walked into the bank armed with various weapons, including automatic rifles and 3,300 rounds of armor-piercing bullets. After entering the bank, the two robbers fired shots into the ceiling to announce their presence and intent. Luckily, two LAPD officers, Loren Farrell and Martin Perello, were making their patrol and saw the two robbers entering the bank. After hearing the gun fires, the two officers put out a radio call of a 211 progress with shots fired that led to back up units to race to the scene. When the officers spotted the police officers, Philip exited the bank from the north door and Matasareanu from the south entrance. According to reports, the two robbers began firing at police officers that led to the exchange of gunfire between the officers on the scene and the bank robbers.

The two robbers marched through the neighborhood spraying stores, homes, and cars with piercing bullets that led to 11 police officers and six bystanders to be wounded. Due to the inferiority of their guns, officers on the scene were unable to overpower the two robbers that created fear of the unnecessary escalation and more casualties than warranted arose. At the moment, the officers on the scene were using service pistols that proved inferior to the automatic guns and piercing bullets of the robbers. However, the arrival of the SWAT team proved helpful in managing the event and taking down the violent robbers. According to reports, Philips found himself surrounded after separating from his partner and decided to shoot himself under his chin and into his head. On the other hand, Matasareanu died from gun wounds on the scene after being shot several times by the SWAT team, who had arrived with powerful armory. The shootout between the LAPD officers and the two robbers lasted for 44 minutes.

How LAPD Dealt with the Media

The events of the North Hollywood Shootout were broadcasted live by various media stations such as CNN. The LAPD allowed various television stations to operate from a secure location where they were able to capture some of the events of the shootout between officers and the two robbers. According to reports, the LAPD offered little restriction to journalists who were able to broadcast the events of the shooting live to the American people. By allowing the media to broadcast the event live, LAPD allowed the story of the incident to tell itself to the public. According to research, cooperating with the press during critical events provides organizations with the opportunity to tell their side of the story, which is crucial for avoiding misinterpretation of information. However, reports indicate that the LAPD did little to answer the questions of the media after the incident. Most of the information regarding the event retrieved by the media was from bystanders, who had little knowledge of what actually transpired between the police and the two robbers. According to reports, secondary sources are not the best sources of information for what happened during an event as they less informed compared to the primary sources. The major reason why the LAPD was reluctant to cooperate with the media is due to the catastrophic events that had unfolded. Many of the officers were injured that had resulted in an increase in stress levels among the LAPD officers. The event had also revealed weaknesses that the LAPD had when it comes to dealing with violent and well-armored criminals. The media was majorly concerned with why the agency had taken so long to deal with the violent robbers. Few officers who were interviewed argued that the lack of powerful weapons, especially for the patrol officers, was the primary reason why it was hard for them to manage the incident.

Additionally, reports indicate that LAPD failed to explain to the media why its patrol officers were not equipped with powerful firepower. Reports on the North Hollywood shootout also suggest that the LAPD contributed to the death of Matasareanu. According to the media reports, LAPD hid information about why the ambulance was late after the offender was shot several times and handcuffed after surrendering. According to reports, the officers at the scene failed to explain why the ambulance was taking longer to arrive at the scene that led to Matasareanu to die. According to reports, the children of Matasareanu even filed for a lawsuit arguing that the LAPD had willingly let the deceased die. This revealed the lack of communication between the media and officers after the incident that led to the speculation of unethical behaviors.

Recommendations for Dealing with Media

Although LAPD was effective when it came to cooperating with the media during the broadcasting process of the shootout, there are other steps that the agency could have taken to ensure that it effectively responded to the press regarding the event. The first step that the agency could have taken is ensuring that there are officers who can answer relevant questions of the media after the incident. Rather than letting the journalists get information from secondary sources, there was a need to ensure that most of the information was from the officers present at the incident. There was a need to ensure that there was a media staging area where questions from the reporters could be clarified. Transparency is an essential aspect when it comes to building positive relations between law enforcement agencies and the media. Agencies need to be open enough to answer questions and concerns of the press, which was something that was lacking after the North Hollywood shootout. The second step that the LAPD could have taken is acting fast. According to reports, it is crucial for law enforcement agencies to ensure that they are well informed about the incident within hours after its resolution. Agencies need to ensure that the media is aware of the events that transpired in an incident before such information is outsourced from secondary sources. Law enforcement agencies have to ensure that they have control regarding the information being conveyed to the public regarding an incident. The LAPD took a lot of time to respond to the media regarding their concerns regarding how the event was managed. This is why there were speculations of unethical practices, such as hiding evidence. Managing misinterpreted information is another crucial step that the LAPD could have taken to justify the resolution of the incident. Amidst allegation of unethical practices and concerns about the capability of the agency, the LAPD failed to respond. As a result, the agency was not able to manage misinterpreted information about what had transpired in the event. It is due to the mismanagement of information that Matasareanu’s children were able to file a lawsuit accusing the LAPD is violating the rights of the suspect. Such lawsuits can easily be avoided if agencies effectively manage misinterpreted information by clarifying and justifying what transpired during the event.

Conclusion

Police-media relationships are crucial for law enforcement agencies in the modern world. When law enforcement agencies and their officers fail to respond effectively to the media, it can lead to future consequences. Agencies need to ensure that regardless of the nature and complexity of a critical incident, there are representatives with the necessary information required to answer the questions and concerns of the media. The information that the media conveys has a significant impact on how the public views an agency and how it handled a critical incident. Although the LAPD took some effective steps when dealing with the media during the North Hollywood shootout, there was more that could be done by the agency to ensure that it effectively dealt with the press. This is especially true when it came to answering the concerns and questions of the media regarding what went wrong and what really happened. Talking to the press of what would only be done to ensure that such events would be effectively managed in the future was not enough to quench the thirst and satisfaction of the media regarding how the event was handled and managed.