SWAT Teams Keep Killing Innocent People in Their Homes

Sometimes they kill their dogs, too.


Today, 85 percent of SWAT operations target private residences. When heavily-armed policemen conduct raids at peoples’ homes, they often go in expecting a fight from hardened criminals—but sometimes they’re wrong. Here are a few cases where botched SWAT raids ended in tragedy:

Bounkham Phonesavanh

Curtis Compton/ZUMA Press

One night last May, 19-month-old Bounkham Phonesavanh (“Bou Bou”) was sleeping in the Atlanta home of relatives. Around 2 a.m., a SWAT team arrived to arrest Bou Bou’s 30-year-old cousin, an alleged drug dealer. Officers threw a flash-bang grenade into the room where Bou Bou was sleeping. It landed in his crib and exploded under his pillow, giving him third-degree burns and injuries so severe he was put in a medically-induced coma. While Bou Bou’s injuries remain severe, he’s expected to survive. The Habersham County Sheriff expressed deep regret but insisted his men were simply following procedure. Earlier this month, a jury cleared them of wrongdoing.
 

Jose Guerena

On the morning of May 5, 2011, in Tuscon, Arizona, a SWAT team assembled outside the home of 26-year-old Jose Guerena. A former Marine who served in Iraq; Guerena had just come home from working the night shift at the copper mine. Local law enforcement believed Guerena was involved in a drug distribution operation with his brothers. Woken up by his wife, who thought she heard burglars, Guerena went outside with an AR-15 rifle to investigate. He was shot 60 times and died before the SWAT team allowed paramedics to help. After his widow sued, the Pima County Sheriff’s Department agreed to a $3.4 million settlement in 2013.
 

Eurie Stamps

On the night of January 4, 2011, Eurie Stamps, a 68-year-old grandfather of 12, was watching a basketball game in his Framingham, Massachusetts, home. A SWAT unit was staking out his home and had already arrested his 20-year-old stepson outside. Despite having booked their suspect, the SWAT team raided the house. Officer Paul Duncan forced Stamps to lie face down on the ground. While Stamp was complying, Duncan allegedly tripped, causing his gun to go off and kill Stamps. Duncan was cleared of any wrongdoing.
 

Tarika Wilson

On January 4, 2008, a SWAT team arrived in the Lima, Ohio, home of 26-year-old Tarika Wilson. The team was looking for her boyfriend, who was suspected of dealing drugs. They broke through the front door and soon opened fire, killing Wilson and injuring her 14-month-old son, whom she was holding. Sgt. Joe Chavalia, who shot and killed her, was placed on paid leave and later cleared of wrongdoing.
 

Aiyana Stanley-Jones

Mandi Wright/Detroit Free Press

On May 16, 2010, a Detroit SWAT crew arrived at the home of seven-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones, with a TV crew from the A&E network trailing them to film a show. They were looking for Chauncey Owens, who allegedly shot a teenager two days before. He was upstairs, but Aiyana was sleeping on the living room couch. The front door was unlocked, but the team busted open the door. Soon after, Officer Joseph Weekly’s gun went off, sending a bullet through Aiyana’s head. She died shortly afterward. Weekly is currently being tried for felony involuntary manslaughter; he claims it was an accident.
 

Dogs

In the past few years, SWAT teams have shot and killed dogs in Minnesota, North Carolina, Missouri, and California. In almost every case, officers have insisted that they felt threatened by the dogs. Pet owners have responded that their dogs were simply startled when SWAT teams broke in—often unannounced—to their homes, and denied that the dogs attacked officers. Take the case of Cheye Calvo, mayor of Berwyn Heights, a quiet D.C. suburb. On the evening of July 29, 2008, a Prince George’s County SWAT team burst into Calvo’s home, responding to a report of a package of marijuana on the doorstep. Upon entering, the officers shot and killed the family’s two Lab retrievers, handcuffed Calvo, his wife, and his mother-in-law, and then forced them to the ground. Police later found that Calvo had been targeted in a scheme in which drug dealers used the homes of unsuspecting people as pickup points for drugs.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate