Police officer Frank White acquitted in road-rage case

By Kelly Wheeler, City News Service

Monday, June 22, 2009
print page
email
share this
comment
bookmark
text size

VISTA - A San Diego policeman was acquitted Monday of weapons charges stemming from the shooting of a woman and her 8-year-old son, who were wounded after she initiated a road-rage encounter with the off-duty officer. Jurors reached the verdict in Frank White’s case on their third day of deliberations.

Had the 29-year-old defendant been convicted of felony gross negligent discharge of a firearm and a misdemeanor count of displaying a firearm in an angry of threatening manner, he would have faced up to nine years in prison. White, who is on voluntarily unpaid leave, will now fight to get his job back, said defense attorney Rick Pinckard.

“We’ve always believed passionately in his innocence,” the lawyer said outside court. “This was a case that we believe never should have been issued.”

Prosecutor Jeff Dusek said it was “an emotional case based on a police officer who, by all accounts, was a decent guy, and decent police officer.”

He said the fact that Rachel Silva, who initiated the road rage run-in, refused to testify, citing her Fifth Amendment right, was a difficult obstacle for the prosecution to overcome.

“She certainly started the incident and gave no indication of willing(ness) to stop,” Dusek said.

The jury left without speaking to reporters, as did White, who was accompanied by his wife.

See related: Acquitted officer Frank White returning to duty

White said he opened fire on Silva after she cut him off and backed into his car in a parking lot the night of March 15, 2008, at the Old Grove Shopping Center in Oceanside. White, whose wife was in the passenger seat, said he fired in self- defense, and that he had no idea that Silva’s son was in the car.

Silva was shot twice in the arm and her son once in the knee area. Her blood-alcohol level was measured at .15 percent — nearly double the legal limit — two hours later. She pleaded guilty last year to felony child endangerment and misdemeanor DUI and is scheduled to be sentenced next month.

During closing arguments last week, White’s attorney said the officer fired his gun when Silva ignored his demands to stop and get out of her car.

Dusek argued that White was not within his rights to empty his gun into Silva’s car, even though he was an off-duty police officer. One witness who heard Silva and White yelling before the shooting thought it was a domestic squabble between a husband and wife, Pinckard said.

The entire incident took less than two minutes and the shooting itself took 3 1/2 seconds, according to Pinckard.

Prior to the shooting, Silva was revving her engine, screeching her tires, aiming and maneuvering her vehicle and accelerating and braking at the last moment, putting the Whites in fear, Pinckard said.

“Her conduct is what Frank White was responding to,” Pinckard told the jury. He said Silva assaulting the Whites with her car was no different from somebody lunging at them with a knife. Pinckard said police officers are not required to retreat because of an “actual and reasonable” belief they’re in danger.

“Silva was clearly placing the Whites in immediate fear and apprehension that they were going to be struck,” the defense attorney said. “It worked! They don’t know what she’s going to do next.”

He said that during the traffic incident before the shooting, all White was thinking was to keep moving and maybe Silva would get tired of the skirmish and stop.

“He’s trying to avoid a confrontation,” Pinckard said. “Where is the unreasonable conduct in any of that? Nothing he does stops her conduct.”

White testified that he saw a person “not in her right mind” when he looked at Silva prior to opening fire, and Pinckard said White displayed his gun in a way consistent with “the way he was trained.”

Dusek said White did not show his badge or identify himself as a police officer, and that he could have done several things to diffuse the situation until help arrived.

Tags:

This entry was posted on Monday, June 22nd, 2009 at 4:23 pm and is filed under Local News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

20 comments

READER COMMENTS

Comment by: Ellyn Posted: June 22, 2009, 5:48 pm

A child could have been killed with the unnecessary gunshots. Any police officer has the duty to assess who is in a vehicle they are about to open fire into. I believe this is also part of his training too. What if there were an infant? Has the world gone MAD? He could have just driven defensively until help arrived. Clearly he had the advantage of better reflexes for outdriving a drunk. We can’t just have people being shot when other less harmful tactics could have worked. Cars can be replaced. Children can’t.

Comment by: Jay Woodward Posted: June 22, 2009, 6:15 pm

Another renegade cop walks… no justice. Doesn’t matter if the woman was a druggie. He’ll make another bad decision and go “macho” on your sister or MOM… maybe there is such as a thing as Karma… Maybe some bangers will take him out. But know… guys like White are losers who just want the gun and power. They don’t mess with bangers and bad guys!… just women and kids. Sleep well Mr. White!

Comment by: Jasmine Posted: June 22, 2009, 7:23 pm

What? Are you kidding Ellyn? She was TWICE the legal limit, FILLED to the brim in alcohol- TWO HOURS after the incident!!!! The boy would have probably been killed in a CAR ACCIDENT caused by his mother had she been allowed to drive away. Not only would her son have been killed when she DUI crashed into YOUR car on the road, but so would the innocent lives of the passenger that she ran into! Don’t you get it. Officer White probably stopped her son and other innocent lives driving around in San Diego from getting killed that day. Look at the BIG picture. Ask the members of MADD, who have had family members killed by people less drunk, and more coherent then that crazy lady!!!!!!!

Comment by: Concerned Posted: June 22, 2009, 8:22 pm

Ellyn, Are you kidding me?? “advantage of better reflexes for outdriving a drunk”?? Geez, I couldn’t imagine creating a more dangerous situation by taking this deranged lunatic on a chase through the parking lot or our city streets. Infant or child, this innocent angel is a repeat victim of his mother and she should be held accountable for putting him in this situation. Praise GOD for Officer White and his training to save himself, his wife, and all other citizens of Oceanside that dark night. God bless you and yours!

Comment by: Mike Davis Posted: June 23, 2009, 12:24 am

Ellen and Jay…You must be as high as Rachel Silva was that night! She put her son in that situation. Ellen…Think! If Officer White drives away “Defensively”, as you suggest he should have, and what does Silva do? She would have followed him onto the city streets! Remember? He tried to get away and go to the Lowes Lot. She followed! So with your “suggestion” now we would have had a drugged up, drunk driver with a proven, documented history of violence chasing him on the same streets your family and mine share! Good idea dorks! When bad people misbehave, good people take action. Good job Officer White. Screw you Bonnie Dumanis and Jeff Dusek. I have lost all respect for both of you. Shame on you. You have demonstrated NO common sense for bringing this to trial.

Comment by: budd willis Posted: June 23, 2009, 6:56 am

Justice was served in this case! Sometimes the system works!

Comment by: Cami Posted: June 23, 2009, 8:38 am

All is not black and white. I do believe it was terribly unfortunate that the officer felt compelled to open fire considering the child in the vehicle, but here’s a little story that happened to me a few months ago ans you might reconsider your standpoint regardint the officer. My husband and I were driving back home from work very early in the morning when we saw a Dodge pick-up stopped horizontally on clairemont mesa blvd. right before it meets Santo rd. We pulled over to see if we could help and the woman driving was unconscious, more disturbing, her toddler was in the back seat crying her eyes out frantically shaking her mother and screaming to wake up, the truck had hit a tree, thankfully, and stopped before falling into the canyon, my husband called the police as we were trying to figure out what was wrong with the driver, it was about 10 am on a tuesday so the possibility of her being drunk never crossed our minds… Diabetic? Epileptic? Right when we heard the sirens the woman came to, and started screaming to me to please take the child… I didn’t know how to respond but the fear in her eyes compelled me to take the girl and sit her in our car… when the response team and police got there they tested the driver… You guessed it, drunk. With her toddler in the back, at 10 am, on a Tuesday. If that tree hadn’t been there, then what? The canyon below, and that child would have had no chance. So true, perhaps there were 100 different things the officer could have attempted to do before pening fire, I won’t argue that, but in situations like these, when timing is everything, and when there is no time to “try” something, reflexes and quick thinking can save lives. Please try to relate to the situation before you pass judgement on someone who only acted to defend himsefl, his wife, and the citizens around the incident who could have also been hurt. Even though the reaction was unfortunate, no reaction may have been fatal.

Comment by: randy rhynes Posted: June 23, 2009, 12:51 pm

Another example of why police officers should not have high capacity magazines. If a civilian had pulled this stunt, they would have faced even more charges. It could have been avoided. Shooting into a car with a minor is inexcusable. There is no possible way to justify injuring or killing someone when you yourself have not been injured. He should have stayed in the car, like he would have suggested to anyone else in that situation.

Comment by: Acquitted officer Frank White returning to duty Posted: June 23, 2009, 4:37 pm

[...] Related: Officer acquitted in road rage case [...]

Comment by: shirley finley Posted: June 23, 2009, 5:21 pm

I wish I had been on the jury to hear the facts in the case, BUT since I wasn’t I will give you my opinion that I feel any officer of the law should identify himself as an officer of the law. With his size alone discharged the gun when not their was no weapion by the victum. I wwouldn”t want to have him on duty in my area. His judgement is poor in this situation and what other mistakes in judgement will be made and a life losat.

Comment by: prv8eye Posted: June 23, 2009, 11:14 pm

Shirley Finley,

A 2000 pound car IS a weapon!
Should he have waited until the woman smashed into the back of his car, causing his gas tank to explode and incinerating his wife in a fire ball?
If you think identifying yourself as a police officer to a person who is drunk and high stops them you have been watching too much tv.
It’s so easy to judge when you were not there and have NO idea what the officer and his wife were going through. WHY do people like you always want to blame the good guy and EXCUSE the bad guy?

Comment by: Sage or Seer Posted: June 24, 2009, 5:49 pm

So I make comments that are very appropriate, yet the so-called “moderators” (read censors) have not allowed my comments to be published. Shows you this news site is bogus old-age, and I will be blogging that you censor the free commentary of citizens, in other sites.

Comment by: jb Posted: June 25, 2009, 4:19 pm

Great Job, jurors….I can totally see how shooting an 8 year old boy is justified…..Another piece of evidence that if your a police officer, the thin blue line means that the law does not apply to you.

Comment by: Don Posted: June 25, 2009, 5:14 pm

I don’t know all the details of the innocent, but if a civilian shot into the car like that, I really doubt he would be acquitted and called a “good” guy. Maybe he did act in self defense but all these law enforcement worshippers would probably not be assuming the same if a non-law enforcement/military person were involved.

Comment by: Polly Baker Posted: June 25, 2009, 7:46 pm

Whether guilty or innocent, Officer White is now a marked marked man simply because he was charged. We have become a nation where innocence doesn’t matter anymore because you could be found guilty in a civil court. The standard of proof is less in a civil court than a criminal court. Heck our government will put your information on the web whether you have been found guilty or not. Even Officer White’s address can be found on the Internet. There are people out there who will publish that information along with the charges that were filed against him. Sadly, we as a society didn’t think of the ramifications of taking public information to the Internet, which had traditionally stopped at the court house steps. All we ended up doing was sacrificing freedom for a false sense of security.

Comment by: MrLiberty Posted: June 25, 2009, 7:53 pm

Obviously the citizens of San Diego can no longer feel safe so long as completely ignorant state worshipping juries exist in their midst.

Just another example of how willingly the citizens of this country will allow a government parasite (is that redundant?) to violate their rights with impunity. Where once we had peace officers, now we have uniformed thugs who feel that they are not only above the law, but the law itself.

What a sad day for San Diego, California, and the United States.

Comment by: Bob Posted: June 29, 2009, 5:21 pm

William Grigg says it best.

************

After three days of deliberations, a jury in San Diego — a militaristic community thoroughly besotted with people in state-issued costumes — acquitted police officer Frank White of felony gross negligent discharge of a firearm and a misdemeanor count of displaying a firearm in an “angry manner.”

The charges arose from a March 2008 “road rage” incident in which White shot Rachel Silva and her eight-year-old son. Silva had cut off White and backed into his car. She was shot twice in the arm and her son was hit once in the knee.

White, who was off-duty at the time and accompanied by his wife, initially claimed that he fired in “self-defense.” He later claimed that he fired his gun when Silva refused his demands to get out of her car. White never displayed a badge or identified himself as a police officer; witnesses to the shooting didn’t recognize the incident as a traffic stop or other enforcement action, but thought it was a domestic squabble.

Larry Ludlow, who has covered this case in the past, informs me: “During the trial, [White] lied several times and was caught in these lies, but the military-worshiping jurors didn’t care. They even swallowed the `fear of death’ excuse despite the difference in the size of the two vehicles — with [White's] vehicle being much larger.”

The case was also distorted by a grotesquely lenient charge: White should have been prosecuted for felonious assault with a deadly weapon, rather than “negligence.” In any case, owing to the fact that White was one of the state’s sanctified armed enforcers, he was acquitted of all charges and reinstated on the force.

Rachel Silva, on the other hand, admitted to being intoxicated and had the book thrown at her. She pleaded guilty to felony child endangerment and misdemeanor DUI charges. The only potentially positive aspect of this case is that Silva’s son will grow up with a usefully cynical attitude toward our tax-devouring “protectors.”

************

Comment by: SFC Ness Posted: July 15, 2009, 6:11 pm

As a member of the military, and a trained MP I can tell you that members of law enforcement are more heavily scutinized in shooting incidents than are average citizens due to their training in force escalation and the use of deadly force. I would be the first to protest if I felt that Gov. affiliation shielded him in any way from a conviction! This woman was clearly a threat to herself and others, and although the situation as a whole is regrettable, Mr. Whites actions were not criminal. For those of you who sit in your easy chairs at home and condem firearms and the and the people who must use them in order to ensure your tranquility (locally or abroad). I suggest that you pick up a weapon and stand a post before you pass judgement on those who do!
A voice from Iraq.

Comment by: nada Posted: September 28, 2009, 12:41 pm

We have a lot of folks here that just really don’t know how to form an argument.

“What if’s” are not arguments. Saying “she would have killed your mom!!!” is just sensationalism, not fact.

Someone here brought up a good point. Call your local police station. Ask them a hypothetical question: “If someone is threatening me with a car, and sideswiped it, and I’m in my car and have already called 911… should I shoot into their vehicle?” What do you think they’ll tell you?

SFC Ness- as an MP and in Iraq, you know the drill: Shout, Show, Shove, Shoot. Shoot is the last resort.

Comment by: Scott T Posted: January 9, 2010, 6:31 pm

This lady, acting like a maniac, with her son in the car… You never know who you are gonna play this dangerous game called “Road Rage” with. When Marijuana is legalized, this shit will stop happening! :)

Post a comment