Cops Kill Rancher Who Was Trying to Kill Bull | Jack Yantis Case Analysis

hello this is dr grande today's question is can i analyze the case of jack yantis just a reminder i'm not diagnosed you made this video only speculating about what could be happening in a situation like this if you enjoy this video please like it subscribe to my channel and consider supporting me on patreon i will put the link to patreon in the description for this video to first i'll look at the background this case which includes the timeline of the incident then move to my analysis on november 1 2015 a 1994 subaru legacy was being operated on highway 95 near council idaho and adams county by a man named william garner his wife dory was in the passenger seat about 6 43 pm the 3000 pound subaru collided with a 2500 pound bull at mile post 142 william was able to escape the vehicle unassisted but dory was trapped in the passenger seat four different people called 9-1-1 to report the accident the scene was noisy as many first responders arrived and worked to rescue dory eventually they were able to extricate dory and both william and dory were airlifted to a hospital as all this was going on the other concern in this case was the bull its leg had been broken but it was still wandering around people had managed to convince the bull to move a little bit away from the scene two police officers were dealing with the bull situation 38 year old deputy cody roland and 31 year old deputy brian wood roland left his body camera in his vehicle and woods body camera was deactivated at 7 22 pm roland radioed dispatch and asked them to contact the owner of the bull roland was concerned that the bull seemed pretty upset and he was worried about the safety of the first responders in adams county idaho it is not unheard of that farm animals get struck by motor vehicles this is a rural county with only 4 000 people this was not a call that would be surprising for the deputies it was customary to contact the owner of an animal that was struck and allow the owner to decide whether the animal should be treated or put down the five-year-old bull was owned by a 62 year old man named jackie antis jack had consumed several beers during the course of that day as the deputies were waiting for jack to arrive roland claimed that the bull charged at them and wood would use his personal ar-15 to shoot the bull six times in the body and neck this did not kill the bull it was a lot of pain and dropped to the pavement but it was still alive jackie antis arrived on the scene on a four-wheeler his wife donna walked to the scene it wasn't far from their residence she was carrying a bolt action ruger 204 this rifle is typically thought of as well-suited to kill varmints it fires a small projectile at very high speed jack climbed off of the four-wheeler and donna handed him the rifle the police were aware that jack would be armed this was the plan jack would arrive and put down the bull they were not alarmed that he had a firearm he needed to have that weapon donna and jack's nephew rowdy paradis also arrived at the scene he was operating a skid steer at this point in the story discrepancies emerge in witness accounts on the one side there is the police officers on the other donna and rowdy first i'll go through what the police officer said then i will cover what differed in the other accounts according to the officers as jack approached the bull carrying his ruger jack said get that piece of blank away from my animal roland assumed that jack was referring to woods ar-15 rifle jack prepared to fire a single shot into the bull's head it looked like he intended to shoot south this is where first responders were still working jack adjusted the direction of the weapon a little bit apparently to avoid shooting toward other people but the deputies were still concerned wood walked over to jack and reached out his hand to keep jack from discharging the weapon wood said something like whoa whoa hang on we're not going to do this rowan claimed that jack swung his rifle across wood's stomach and shoved wood interestingly deputy wood never claimed that jack pushed him wood ordered jack to put the rifle down instead jack aimed the rifle at roland's chest wood reached for the rifle roland was not sure if he actually grabbed the rifle jack's rifle discharged roland believed the jack had shot him in the side both deputies opened fire they claimed that jack would not drop his rifle they thought he was reloading so they kept firing when they say reloading i think what they mean is operating the action on the weapon the weapon was already loaded but because it's a bolt action the bolt has to be operated between each shot roland fired four rounds from his 45 caliber glock 30 semi-automatic pistol and struck jack four times he admitted that he may have fired his weapon at the same time that jax ruger discharged rather than after suggesting that the discharge of the ruger did not motivate roland to use deadly force he had already made the decision to use deadly force regardless of the discharge status of the ruger rifle deputy wood fired at least 10 rounds from his ar-15 and struck jack eight times jackie antis did not survive at 7 27 pm just five minutes after asking dispatch to contact the owner of the bull rowan told dispatch that shots had been fired the officers handcuffed both donna and rowdy donna went into cardiac arrest and had to be transported to a hospital she would survive donna and rowdy agreed that the officer shot and killed jack but differed in their accounts on other details don and rowdy maintained that jack was just about to shoot the bull in the head the rifle was less than two feet away angled toward the ground jack was clearly focusing on the bull and ready to pull the trigger when one of the deputies grabbed jack without warning donna and rowdy did not agree on which officer grabbed jack donna said it was wood but later changed her story to roland rowdey always said it was roland this discrepancy would become crucial when the state was considering if it could file charges against the officers the deputies did not issue any verbal commands as a deputy was wrestling with jack the ruger discharged the deputy shot and killed jack without ever perceiving any type of threat now moving back to the narrative on which everyone agreed after jack was shot and killed it was discovered that deputy rowan had not been shot the adams county sheriff arrived at the scene he made no effort to separate roland and wood which allowed them to coordinate their stories no criminal charges were ever filed in this case both officers eventually left the police force in 2018 a civil suit filed by jack's family against adams county was settled for 2.6 million dollars now moving to my analysis the main question in this case is this were the officers involved guilty of murder or any other crime in connection with the death of jack antis before i attempt to answer that question let's take a brief look at the background of the two deputies this may provide some context as far as their behavior on the night they shot and killed jack antis deputy roland had worked for another police department prior to taking a job with adams county in 2007 he was counseled for his attitude during a traffic stop the presumption would be that his attitude was poor not cheerful and positive in 2008 he received a letter of reprimand and one year probation for conduct unbecoming of an officer in 2010 he had sex with a female confidential informant which of course was a violation of policy and in 2011 it was discovered that he had mischaracterized his military service on his employment application moving to deputy wood prior to being a police officer wood bragged about how he had trained navy seals and swat team members the presumption here is that he was lying wood first became a police officer in 2010 it was in another jurisdiction in 2011 wood pulled over a vehicle for driving two miles per hour over the speed limit he used excessive force on an elderly man who was operating the vehicle in late 2011 wood poached an elk and allegedly lied about it to investigators he was fired in 2011 and in 2013 hired by adams county wood described himself as a prepper and survivalist who thought that society would collapse and he would have to kill looters he wanted to make sure that he was mentally prepared to pull the trigger because everybody knows that rural idaho is the epicenter of the looter community that's where all the looter conventions are hosted now moving to the question of guilt did the deputies commit a crime in this case let's take a look at the factors both foreign against the idea that they were guilty starting with the inculpatory factors the deputies shot and killed jack antis everybody agrees this is true both officers were close to jack when they fired their weapons they each weighed over 200 pounds compared to jack who weighed 180 pounds jack had no motive to attack the officers they called him to the scene it wasn't like he had driven down there just to confront them deputy wood may have provoked the situation by shooting jack's bull thereby causing the bull to unnecessarily suffer why didn't deputy would shoot the bull in the head instead of shooting it six times in the body and neck perhaps it never occurred to deputy wood that the brain is a vital organ considering he didn't seem to ever make use of his the men were given time to coordinate their stories but even with that there was a discrepancy about whether wood made physical contact with jack before the shooting roland initially claimed that he was shot this was not true the officers handcuffed donna and rowdy it was like the officers were trying to build the story that their lives were in danger they had to protect themselves from jack's family even though there was no evidence that those family members were trying to harm the officers moving to the exculpatory factors jack's blood alcohol level was .104 which means he was legally impaired and should not have been operating a firearm jack made a statement that could be interpreted as aggressive to the officers jack may have pointed his rifle in an unsafe direction as he was getting ready to put down the bull donna and rowdy did not initially agree about which officer approached jack and started the confrontation the deputies had no motive to kill jack they had never met him before and they had no idea who he was when considering the evidence do i think that the officers were guilty of a crime in connection with jack's death i think in reality yes deadly force was not warranted but they are not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt essentially this case comes down to two officers who said they were justified and two witnesses who said they were not the citizens are more credible than the police especially considering how the officers became dramatic and handcuffed jack's family members after the officers shot and killed jack but i still believe there is reasonable doubt because jack may have threatened them what do i think actually happened in this case this is just my opinion i think that the officers were inclined to let jack do what he needed to do with the bull but they became concerned at where he was pointing his rifle the officers had the right and the responsibility to ensure jack safely operated that weapon this was on a public road they were allowed to stop him from shooting i think that when deputy wood grabbed jack jack's finger was already mounting the trigger of the rifle as jack reacted to being grabbed the barrel of the rifle moved upward causing jack to pull the trigger this is a fairly common way that rifles are unintentionally discharged a person is holding a rifle and they swing the barrel upward without removing their finger from the trigger i don't think that jack had time to remove his finger from the trigger i think that deputy wood intervened too late in the process jack was just about to fire on the bull jack was upset about what happened deputy wood became frightened and started shooting roland joined in for some unknown reason the deputies should have just grabbed jack they had a tremendous physical advantage over him especially considering jack was intoxicated there was no reason to use deadly force in this case what lessons can we learn from this case lesson number one interactions between the public and the police should always be video recorded law enforcement interactions are always at least somewhat dangerous officers tend to be sensation seeking and they're carrying weapons less number two alcohol and firearms don't mix jack should not have tried to fire a weapon while intoxicated and the police should have recognized jack was impaired lesson number three there should have been more communication in this incident about what each party was going to do everybody was using firearms when they should have been using their ability to think and communicate lesson number four bulls should not be allowed on public roads as everyone knows they are terrible drivers those are my thoughts in the case of jackie antis please put any opinions and thoughts in the comment section they always generate an interesting dialogue as always i hope you found my analysis of this topic to be informative thanks for watching

Channel: Dr. Todd Grande

Views: 42,179

Keywords:

Id: Y3r2MW5R4aM

Length: 14min 51sec (891 seconds)

Published: Fri Dec 17 2021

Reddit Comments

[u/riscos3]

Don't know why they didn't call a vet and put down the animal, why wait to contact the "owner"???

I knew there would be trouble when someone called "Rowdy" turned up, and how did the bull charge people if it had a broken leg?