Follow-up on 2005 Ranger-Involved Shooting
NPS Digest
National Park Service
November 5, 2007
By DAVE BRENNAN
On July 27, 2005, two Crater Lake rangers responded to a
domestic disturbance in Mazama Campground. During the incident, one of the
rangers shot and killed the man involved in the disturbance as he charged them
while brandishing a deadly weapon and threatening to kill them. The
investigations into this shooting, and the board of review that was convened
afterward, found that the involved rangers were acting within the scope of their
duties and in full compliance with National Park Service policies.
The U.S.
Attorney’s Office for the District of Oregon concluded that it was a justifiable
and necessary use of deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm. At the
time of the shooting, based on the interests and needs of the involved rangers,
and in consultation with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and deputy solicitor, the
park chose not to release their names to the public. With the passage of two
years, and in consultation with the involved rangers, comes the realization that
sharing information about shooting incidents with the law enforcement community
can be an important step toward providing healing and closure. The sharing of
this information, including the names of involved rangers, can also help prevent
an officer from carrying the burden of a line of duty shooting alone in his or
her private life.
The rangers involved were seasonal ranger Pieter Sween, who
was the ranger directly involved in the shooting, and supervisory ranger Peter
Reinhardt, who as Sween’s partner provided backup and assistance during the
incident. In recognition of their actions during the shooting, Sween and
Reinhardt have been presented with exemplary act awards. Fourteen other Crater
Lake employees were presented with unit citation awards for their actions in
responding to and managing the incident. Rangers Sween and Reinhardt acted
quickly, decisively, and appropriately to prevent death or serious injury during
a rapidly evolving situation. They demonstrated superb courage, judgment and
tactics in successfully resolving a violent and dynamic situation without injury
to innocent persons.
It’s hoped that this incident serves as a reminder of the
importance of appropriate training and tactics, and that the lessons learned can
help the safety of other officers.
