E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Swikar Patel / The Journal Gazette
Three adults fled from the scene of the hostage incident when police arrived Wednesday, March 20, leaving a 3-year-old boy behind.
A man in Fort Wayne, Ind., snatched his ex-girlfriend off of a city bus, fatally shot her with a shotgun, then took a 3-year-old boy hostage and holed up in a house — only to be shot dead by police snipers, authorities said.
After pulling her off a bus, Kenneth Knight, 45, killed Jacqueline Hardy, 49, with a shotgun blast about 8 a.m. ET on the sidewalk in front of dozens of children who were on their way to school, officials said.
He then fled with the toddler to a house a mile and a half away, where police found him and surrounded the property. Negotiators made contact with Knight but when he refused to surrender or release the child, Reuters reported.
Several hours later, about 4:30 p.m., two police snipers — who had been ordered to shoot "if there was an opportunity" — fired simultaneously, Police Chief Rusty York said, NBC station WISE of Fort Wayne reported.
Knight was killed by a single gunshot, York said.
Officers carried the young boy out of the house shortly thereafter. He was unharmed and was returned to his parents, they said.
Police told WISE that Hardy and Knight were sitting together on the bus Wednesday morning when the confrontation began. Hardy had taken out a restraining order against Knight, they said, describing the killing as a domestic disturbance that got out of hand.
Knight also knew three adults in the house where he took refuge, police said, but he wasn't closely acquainted with the child. The adults fled the house when police arrived, leaving the child behind.
Krista Stockman, a spokeswoman for Fort Wayne Community Schools, said the shooting was witnessed by dozens of children who were walking or busing to school. Counselors were called in to talk with students at three schools in the immediate area.
"Some of the children may be very young, and they many not even realize what they saw, and so as they start hearing about what happened either from their peers or when they go home tonight, they may suddenly realize: 'Wait I saw that happen. That's what was going on,'" Stockman said. "And that could have a profound impact on them.
"As a community, we need to make sure that we're not letting these things happen," she told WISE. "We need to remember that there are little eyes out there watching all the time, and this kind of thing really will affect these children."
Leave a Comment:
please look at the picture and tell me you feel safe. This looks more and more like a war zone in america. something is terribly Wrong.
Warren, Just Hold On To Your Guns and Ammunition...Who knows where this is going with these WarZone dress ups.
I feel much safer with that than a picture of a man who just murdered someone and holding someone else hostage allowed to run free with no one trying to stop him.
Nice going to the Police!! Anyone that takes a child hostage deserves to be shot!
I thought the gun nuts might be celebrating this but they went in a whole nother direction. I applaud you nut jobs. Your shenanigans are totally unpredictable. Woman killed and child held hostage-you forget about the murderer and go strait to the police wearing green bulletproof outfits. You got me big time there. You really thought outside of your bunkers with that one. Got your tin foil hats on tonight huh? Wow, just wow.
I'm with David Mora on this incident. When somebody kills one person and takes a child hostage at gun point, I want to know that trained experts are dealing with him (or her).
The police did what they had to do, and the only person killed was the perpetrator. What is the actual source of your complaint, warren? You don't like how their dressed?
A situation where a man who kills a woman in front of school children, then takes a 3 year old hostage IS a combat zone! The police officers are appropriately armed/dressed for such a situation. Personally, I'd much rather have a situation that looked like this picture, than one where the law enforcement response is undermanned, underarmed, and not prepared. This is not a situation where you call the Boy Scouts; you get the best you have to shut it down before someone else gets killed, and that's what happened. I don't like the picture either, but I'd rather have that picture and the child safe. In our current society, where everyone and their crazy brother can get a weapon without too much effort, this kind of thing is going to happen. Thank God the child is safe.
I bet the gunman was a legal gun owner... seems he was exercising his 2nd amendment rights when he shot and killed an unarmed woman.
It's all so far past a discussion about gun ownership. Doesn't anyone see that it's about an entire culture that includes generations of horrible, inept parenting that produce people without class, breeding, anger management, higher education and any sense of right and wrong? It's not about mental illness, it's about a reversal toward barbaric behavior because they know nothing else. We must consider that the corner stone of civilization, as we know it, is crumbling in this country. It's quite embarrassing, really.
Taintted. You obviously do not know firearms laws. It says in the article that the shotgun wielding goon has a restraining order against him, which disqualifies him from gun ownership. Know the laws before you babble.
Flying Hermit, the point was the guy most likely owned the gun before the restraining order was put in place. Furthermore, the NRA has made it very easy for anyone to go out and buy a gun, so a restraining order wouldn't have got in his way.
Thanks Clueless American Anti-Gun nut...
You still have that confused look on your face.... Oh well, whatever comes natural to ya....
@ ANNIE...THE HEAD OF THE NAIL HAS BEEN HIT....outstanding summation....
I shouldn't have been surprised at the uproar, but I was. Warren made a very obvious comment about how much this photo looks like a war zone, and he was immediately blasted by those who thought that this was somehow a criticism of the police or of gun owners' rights or whatever else cause drives them. It wasn't. We have no idea from this simple, obvious. statement what Warren's views are on gun regulation. All we know is that a house surrounded by what looks like armed soldiers seems more like Iraq than the U.S. That should not be controversial, regardless of whether you are an NRA member or an anti-gun person. Please don't try to add other text to his simple observation that this looks like a war zone.
The guy was not a registered gun owner. He was a convicted felon who just got our from serving 10 year for a parole violation for having a fire arm as a felon. The first time around he was dealing cocaine. Once again people want to make gun control comments. Another case of someone that didn't obtain the gun legally. The FWPD handled this situation exceptionally.
Shot her with a shotgun? He must have listened to Joe on TV the other day. Glad they got him!
somewhere NRA members are mumbling, need more guns to be safe... I hear that its a warm, happy place.
Uuuummmm, MrSlowshot, Your "heroes" over at the "homeland security" bought out the house of guns, ammo, attack vehicles and drones both attack and surviellance so they can EyeBall You Real Real Cloose like in your pic.
slow
The NRA had nothing to do with this. Go back to you cave
What terrible thing to have happened. A woman has died because someone couldn't control his emotions, used a weapon to settle his problems the wrong way. Then grabbed a little child, another poor choice, took refuge in some people's home he somewhat knew, and after refusing to just do the right thing and walk out, he lost his life, making another person have to shoot him.Affecting that shooter's life. But do either shooter know which one pulled the fatal trigger?
How quickly a series of poor choices has suddenly altered reality for so many people. Two dead individuals, a bunch of children and possibly one professional adult life. More interesting, a community changed, rattled, and a gazillion folks up in arms over... well arms and their place in society.
The sun will rise tomorrow, another 24 hours to see who else will have their life affected by someone's action and choices concerning a gun. This I can guarantee. Some will accuse the NRA folks of not caring or promoting gun violence, some will call for the Second Amendment to be upheld. Some will call gun folks nut jobs.Others will accuse pro laws on banning folks of being anti-Second Amendment. Fewer will mention let's work together AND even less will remain calm through out this whole thing.Those who manage to walk the thin line between all those competing labels trying to find the answers which best represent most reasonable, will need the wisdom of Solomon to help them figure it all out, what really is best for our nation in the end.Without compromising our freedoms, for security.As Thomas Jefferson warned us about.
For the ones screaming about the gun enthusiast, I can guarantee you even if guns were outlawed this man would have gotten one to do what he did. It had nothing to do with the gun, it had all to do with the person behind it. Before you all start, I do have to tell you I don't own a gun, but I believe in the rights of the people to own if they so choose.
"This looks more and more like a war zone in america. something is terribly Wrong"
Something is terribly wrong-the increased militarization of U.S. police forces. The Dept. of Education even does raids like this-most recently in CA. Our government is out of control-they want total control over peoples lives-everything we do-what we can eat and drink,where we can live,how much water and electricity we can use,what kind of light bulbs we can use,what kind of toilets we can use,in many western states,it is llegal to own a rain barrel to collect rainwater off of your own roof-the state claims it owns the rain-the gov't. will soon control every aspect of our lives-unless people start voting politicians out of office-and we get some new people elected from both parties-politicians like Sens. Feinstein,Schumer,Leahy,Mccain,Graham,Reid,Pelosi,etc. need to go-we do not need politicians to serve 20+ years-that's when we get problems.
put your tin foil back on and stop posting bull@!$%# here. this is standard police response to a hostage situation.
Hey Larry, maybe you should go live some place where life is better... like Mexico, Iraq, Israel, France, Greece, the U.K., etc.
Technically, Taintted, it's a Faraday Shield. If you think ninja-cop "standard police response" is A-okay in the U.S.A., you might want to look into some tinfoil haberdashery your own self.
What Starvin Larry is posting note of (the constant, niggling encroachment of NannyStatist authority, control, and power in ordinary life) is reminiscent of the "standing army" of the King that the colonists objected to. With the added force of modern opinion-steering and -forging apparatus. You are evidently comfortable in the warm and fuzzy conception of the King taking care of you better than you might yourself, because the King knows better.
Be more mindful of the ideas that surround you, because the New Normal might not be all that friendly. And consider bull@!$%# more slowly and quietly. Clever and quick is not better than correct.
kyliekoo, I think Starvin Larry better represents American values by noting and voicing his concerns in the open hope that fellow citizens will help keep the ship of state on its proper course, not invite him overboard.
American exceptionalism at its best encourages dissent, it does not squelch it. That's what happens in the other vacation spots you mentioned, and often under the table. Playing with all hands above the deck might be a little slower, but the players don't feel slighted, cheated or insulted. If you feel the need to shout down (or disappear) others, maybe your own ideas aren't that solid.
"Two snipers fired simultaneously"
"Suspect killed by single gun shot"
....so...one of them missed?
What makes you think that even trained professionals can't have an off day? Guns are not 100% accurate. Never have been.
That's what scares me about the "every American has the right to own a gun" bit. Uh, no--I belong to a veterans' organization and, despite them having been in the military and trained how to use a firearm, I can think of at least ten individuals off-hand that have no rights owning a firearm. They're not responsible, they have criminal records and/or anger management issues, etc.
Rah rah gun rights, and all (I come from a hunting family, along with being ex-military) but by NO means is this a right that should be accessible by all. Guns are quirky instruments. A sniper missed in this incident, and a four-year-old can shoot his face off. I barely trust them in the hands of police officers and "trained" military, much less the general public.
The second sniper may have hit, just not in a spot that killed. I'm guessing the snipers weren't right next to each other, so they might have had different clean shots. Regardless, well done.
I only thought this happened in Gary, IN!
The plague is spreading.
I had the same thought Travis, either bad shooting or bad reporting.
My bet goes to bad reporting, hands down. This is, after all, NBC.
Hold Onto Your Guns and Ammunition; And DON'T, WHATEVER YOU DO, Fall for one of those Subtle and Not So Clever little "surrender your guns to our local police drive!! We even pay you AND No Questions Asked!!" Anybody who falls for that one is too dumb to own a gun. Listen Up People; We are paying $4.50 p/g of Gas and in Venezuela they pay 10CENTS P/G for the SAME Stuff and "The Sequester"? A nice way of saying "You Working Americans are gonna pay the evil corporation prices and You are gonna PAYBACK ALL the $60Trillion the Evil rich aristocrats and their corporations Stole from America. HOLD ONTO YOUR GUNS, with these Militarized cops we don't know where All of this is going....... YET.
"Venezuela they pay 10CENTS P/G". Actually it is 18 CENTS P/G,BUT the Government isn't taxing the gas. The Government is subsidizing 90% of the price of gas.
another tin foil hat user. sorry phantom but this is standard police response to a hostage situation. those are not traffic cops you twit. they are specially trained officers. they are called swat.
Y'know, Taintted, I'm not sure whether you're just casually insulting (passing for sarcasm), or trying ad hominem attacks to gigglepaint or eliminate your "opposition."
Either way, it isn't clear what you are opposed to... are you in favor of more militarized police? You like local Special Weapons And Tactics squads, and desire more Homeland $ecurity training for the favored few? You don't think Officer Barney is capable of shooting the Bad Guy without a black Tactical Costume? You think more cops should be trained to "shoot 'if there was an opportunity,' from distant hiding?
Let's be clear. I'm completely glad somebody killed this mad dog before it did more damage, but I don't think that result leads to the conclusion that more gubmint is better. What is it that comforts you about this paramilitary police action, and causes you to disparage anyone else who notes Authority's ever-present mission creep?
Actually, South American gasoline is of extremely poor quality. Cars built for sale in the United States would run terribly on it and it is not recommended you drive your own car, if you're an American, in South America at all. Rather, you rent a car there or buy a local car. Once again, gasoline in Venezuela is NOT the same thing as gasoline in the United States.
Now THAT's some solid reporting.
Jeeeez...
This man was clearly a mentally ill person. If he could get a not-so-bad lawyer, he could walk away with a temporary insanity.
Gun control is not the solution. If Obama want to cut crime, he can kill all mentally ill people (20-50 million in various degrees) or give them free/low-cost mental care.
V, you are perpetuating the myth that the insanity plea really works. Google it to see what percent of the time it works (almost never), even if the accused has a clearcut history of serious mental illness. Just as one example, if the accused is forced by demons to commit a murder, no matter how tortured he/she is, that does not justify an insanity defense, as long as the accused knew that it was wrong. I'm not arguing for or against the status quo with the insanity defense, just pointing out that it is almost never successful. Check it out for yourself.
Had a restraining order taken out on him, but still had a gun? What's wrong with this picture?
A RO isn't worth the paper it's written on. Just ask the woman he killed....
Man! Some of these mad-ass killas just will not follow the rules!
He murdered a woman. He took a child hostage. Those of you who are complaining about the militarization of our police need to get a grip on reality. These people who defend us from murderous offenders put their lives on the line every time they go to work. They are in no less danger than if they were combat soldiers. It is right that they have the best gear that can be provided. They are risking their lives to protect you & yours. How many of you go to work knowing that doing your job may cost you your life? They did a great job. Under these heinous circumstances they brought about the best possible solution that was possible to achieve. They deserve nothing but the utmost respect.
well put wallace.
Wallace -
What is it in this (admittedly desirable) resolution of a horriffic hostage situation that compels you to the belief that police militarization is the answer?
Any patrol cop (or decent deer hunter) with a carbine in the trunk might have reached the same resolution without all the helmet/BDU/"shoot 'if there was an opportunity' nonsense. One riot, one Ranger. Not squads of (literally) assault-rifle equipped ninja cops sneaking around.
You may be conflating this outcome with justification for more, bigger, louder Black Knights. Be careful; that's just what they want you to think (and agree to, and pay for).
Beezup In cases of violence against a known armed murderer a force much larger than necessary is often used because there are unknown & unpredictable aspects to the situation. I am well versed in the use of firearms and what you say is true with regard to only needing one shot to end the perpetrators life. In this case 2 shots were fired & only one bullet hit & killed the assailant. People who are less than expert are not used in these situations. Still for an [as yet] unknown reason one of the bullets did not hit the intended target. This world is full of people who, for many reasons, might take advantage of such a situation to even a score or make their bones by taking out a cop engaged in his work. I do not fear the police. I do not fear our military. I fear the politicians who work hard to take the right to have firearms from citizens who are not criminals. Leaving only criminals such as the deceased killer, who do not follow laws, with firearms.
I see some people complaining about the militarization of the police, but what do you expect, really? They have been given every excuse to. Gun owners want to own every type of gun in the world and most often more then one gun, want to have as big a mag on them as they can lift, get weapons as close to military arms as they can get, and what are the police supposed to do?
And if a officer wearing body armor thinks it'll increase the chance of him going home alive that night, he'll certainly wear it. And the police have to have equal or superior weapons to control a situation, so they use the REAL military weapons. Maybe someday they'll carry a LAWS rocket in every car instead of a shotgun.
You want less militarized police? Then lets try to be a less militarized country with fewer militarized citizens in it.
Take a deep breath, and review what few facts as are presented: single shotgun. Single shooter. Previous record. Restaining Order. Crazy, murdering ex-. Grabbed a kid. Holed up in a house he's acquainted with...
Now, what part of that scenario promotes militarized police? Any of it could've happened in the 1880s. What does it have to do with private ownership of weapons, or threats to police personnel?
You believe this situation bears some relation to "militarized citizens?" And you believe police don't already have "superior weapons to control a situation?"
This was resolved with a single well-regulated bullet, by a single officer (okay, X2). Everything else was an after-the-fact, secure-the-location response, a parade of gear/Shock-and-Awe display/training exercise. If that sort of street theater minimizes further damage, well and good. Sadly, the nuts don't always evaluate situations properly, and some of them just spinout faster when confronted.
I'm at least a little concerned that publicization of this new murderous grab-a-baby, last resort flameout is gonna cause more copycats polishing the technique. It's my fervent hope that every one of them is painfully stopped, and lives long enough to internalize what a horrible, hate-filled mess they've made of their families' lives.
I keep telling women this: If you want to get shot and killed, date a gun nut. They never learn.
I'm shocked a white guy didn't do this.
He was an ex-con, so he had to use the NRA's loophole to get a gun. You know, gun show.
I've been to gun shows. Every time you purchase anything munitions based (clip/ammo/firearm) they require and run a valid ID/license and then call, what I assume is, the FBI for a background check.
So if you're going to call it an NRA loophole, lets call it - He was probably given or inherited the shotgun.
So, she took out a RO against him but then was sitting together with him on the bus?
It's my guess that Mr. Knight violated the restraining order and Ms. Hardy was probably trying to talk him out of using the gun he obviously had with him hence the sitting together on the bus. Seriously, if someone came up to you with a gun, what would you do? Run or calmly try to talk them out of shooting you? Outrunning a bullet seems pretty pointless as has been shown time and time again in these situations. Sometimes talking calmly helps, although in this case, the man with the gun was past talking. PLEASE DO NOT BLAME THE VICTIM IN THIS! Once a restraining order is put in place, I would be fine with the police getting a search warrant, searching the recipient of the restraining order's house, and confiscating any weapons. When you threaten anyone's life to the point of their needing a restraining order, you should lose the privelige/right of gun/weapons ownership. To me, this would just be common sense but you will never see it because there would be too many screaming that the government is being too intrusive in trying to take their guns/weapons. Sadly, women, children, male domestic abuse victims, and innocent by-standers bear the brunt of these lack of common sense weapons laws and/or the lack of enforcement of them.
Thank goodness the police managed to kill this guy. Does anyone but me wonder about three adults running out of the house and leaving the toddler to fend for himself?
Not as much as I wonder how the guy just boarded the bus carring a shotgun. And how he dragged a woman off the bus with a shotgun one hand and nobody including the driver said or did anything. Must happen every day.
New headline!
Gun kills woman, other guns save day! People bow in amazement!
this really amazes me, I live about an hour from Ft. Wayne and go there alot and this kinda stuff doesnt really happen there.. a testament to the times we live in.
Obviously, this tiny aspect of the incident is dwarfed by the shocking crime and its admirable cessation... but, really, what responsibilty does the School District have to counsel students whose "little eyes" have been "impacted?"
What, exactly, are the Helping Professionals telling the kids that they couldn't have gotten from any other Responsible Adult in their lives? Y'know, parents, teachers, ministers... or, are all those folks too busy and liabilty-conscious to talk to the shorties?
I'll bet it's not something along the lines of "It's okay to be afraid, but it's not gonna help to be paralyzed by fear. See here, Johnny, mad-dog evil can crop up in your life for no good reason, so buck up and get prepared for it."