FREE e-Newsletter
Important News - Hot Topics
Get them Now!

ESS Crossbow Photochromic Ballistic Eyeshield - ESS Eyepro
The ESS Crossbow Photochromic eyeshield is created using Transition Optics...

Top News

Ark. Troopers Pass 107-Year-Old Man's Shooting to Special Prosecutor

September 11, 2013  | 

A special prosecutor will review the fatal shooting of a 107-year-old man by Pine Bluff Police SWAT officers, after the Arkansas State Police declined to investigate the case.

The Pine Bluff City Council requested state troopers review the case, following the shooting, reports the Associated Press.

Prior to the fatal shooting on Saturday, Monroe Isadore had told officers they would have to shoot him or take him to jail before he went to live with his son-in-law. Isadore made the comments in June, after a dispute with his daughter and son-in-law, reports the Associated Press. Isadore was hit by police gunfire after he opened fire on officers who entered his home.

Isadore had purchased the handgun used in the incident about a month earlier and told friend Laurie Barlow his daughter was abusing him. Isadore is nearly deaf and legally blind, reports KATV.

Comments (6)

Displaying 1 - 6 of 6

Ima Leprechaun @ 9/12/2013 11:52 PM

If somebody is shooting at me I would likely shoot back. The officers would have no way to know what the physical disabilities were of someone shooting at them but its clear he knew how to fire a gun in their direction. And "nearly deaf and legally blind" equals "hard of hearing and needs glasses to read".

Nichole @ 9/13/2013 4:11 AM

It's a sad story, but I don't think that the officer's acted inappropriately for the situation. They were being fired upon, they returned fire. End of story. Doesn't matter if you're a 17 year old or a 107 year old. If you shoot at police, expect to be shot at.

I'm sure that plenty will jump on the media BS train with the "nearly deaf, legally blind" thing as Ima has stated. And that's bull too. If he was both, how did he know anyone was there to shoot at?

The saddest part is that he told someone that he was being abused and no one did anything about it. Perhaps he told the wrong people.

The only wrongdoing I could see is that if in June, when he made the comment about never going to live with his son-in-law, he told the police he was being abused and no one did anything about it.

Otherwise, this is a tragic loss of an old man's life that didn't make the right decision.

Bob @ VA @ 9/13/2013 4:32 AM

Looks like a cut-and-dry case of self-defense for the officers. Once the 107-year-old started shooting, the officers had every right to respond with like force to defend themselves and civilians in the area who were in danger of being struck by stray rounds. Very sad story for all concerned.

Matt @ 9/13/2013 5:26 AM

Agree, good but tragic shoot. One must wonder however, why was there a SWAT raid on his home?

Marc @ 9/13/2013 7:15 AM

It is indeed a very sad story. The officers were defending themselves, and a bullet fired by a 107-year-old can kill you as easily as one fired by a 27-year-old. The officers were really between a rock and a hard place on this one.

Jim B. @ 9/13/2013 10:06 AM

I agree, once they went into the house and he started shooting, the outcome was a foregone conclusion. You cannot fault the officers for shooting when they were being shot at.

The question comes to, as Matt mentioned, was it necessary for them to enter the house at that time? Let me be clear, I'm not saying it wasn't, but that is the real question. I know it had gone on for hours and they had tried numerous other options. Was there some chance in the situation that necessitated an entry at that time? Was he firing randomly out the window? Did something happen that created an emergency requiring them to get him out right now? Or was he just an person refusing to come out? He didn't have any hostages, didn't pose an immediate threat to anyone? Again, let me be clear, there may have been something requiring immediate action, I don't know, but that's what needs to be answered.

Join the Discussion

POLICE Magazine does not tolerate comments that include profanity, personal attacks or antisocial behavior (such as "spamming" or "trolling"). This and other inappropriate content or material will be removed. We reserve the right to block any user who violates this, including removing all content posted by that user.
Police Magazine