Glen Boldware, 47
Glen Boldware, a 47-year-old black man, was shot to death by an LAPD officer in the 1800 block N. Sawtelle Blvd in West Los Angeles about 2:15 a.m. Friday, Jan. 4. Officer Peter Mah was patrolling the area in an unmarked car when he noticed Boldware, who allegedly was stealing from a lumber yard. Mah followed Boldware as he drove north on Sawtelle Boulevard and when he noticed he was being followed; Boldware stopped his car, stepped out and walked up to Mah's car carrying a lighter that looked like a small-caliber pistol. Boldware was shot several times and died instantly. Los Angeles Times by Paloma Esquivel.
(The LAPD initially described Boldware as holding a gun.)



this "armed man" actually pulled a cigarette lighter on the cop -- NOT a gun.
quite a difference...
Posted by: david a. | January 05, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Why didn't the officer call it in? Did the lumber yard report any missing items to go along with this declaration by the officer?
Posted by: James | January 07, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Doesn't make much of a difference at all. Same result. Seems pretty strightforward as long as forenscics back up the story- "...Boldware stopped his car, stepped out and walked up to Mah's car...". If the science is there you can' t blame the officer in this one.
Posted by: daledo | January 07, 2008 at 12:09 PM
i bet all cops carry lighters with them. so when they shoot someone they can just plant it and say, 'oh i thought it was a gun.'
pathetic.
Posted by: james | January 07, 2008 at 05:34 PM
David, you're kidding, right? How was the officer supposed to tell the difference? Wait until the guy fired to see whether a flame or a bullet came out of the barrel? If this guy had pulled the "lighter" on you and demanded your money, would you have known it was a fake, or would you have handed over your wallet? The guy had been observed in the commission of a felony and pointed a reasonable looking "gun" at an officer....he got what he had coming...
Posted by: Edgar Friendly | January 08, 2008 at 10:53 AM
I DON'T THINK THE POLICE HAD TO SHOT HIM THREE TIMES IN THE STOMACH AND ONCE IN THE CHEST. I DON'T BELIEVE THE STORY I HEARD THREE VERSION. IT ALL SOUND KIND OF FUN TO ME.
Posted by: CORSANDRA SMITH | January 08, 2008 at 02:52 PM
Moral of the story is you don't walk up to a police car after you have been pulled over, and you never carry anything in your hands. And its even more foolhardy to do it nighttime.
Getting shot 4 times? Well, this isn't a movie and the police do shoot to kill.
Posted by: Mark | January 08, 2008 at 05:34 PM
Let's be clear. The officer was in an UNMARKED CAR.
The man who was killed thought the man in the UNMARKED CAR was following him, and stopped to see why they were following him.
Did the officer identify himself? Before or after shooting 4 times?
Did the officer turn his lights on Boldware at any point?
Did the officer know for certain that Boldware was not an employee of the lumber yard, or otherwise authorized to be taking things?
Why did the officer continue to follow Boldware rather than stopping him on suspicion of theft?
Posted by: KW | January 09, 2008 at 10:34 PM
I was deeply disturbed to know that if you are being followed by someone then you stop and get out to see if there is a problem, Then you lose your life because a man got out, they got scared ( the Police) no questions asked, they did not identify themselves, it was a shoot now ,ask questions later? They thought or maybe that what that want us to believe (the public)... If you have done a crime, your first mind would say get away, however, not stop your car and get out..
Glen Will be missed by all friends and family
Posted by: DeeDee | January 10, 2008 at 03:04 PM
"quite a difference..."
not quite. not if the guy was pretending if it was a gun. not if he was pointing it at the cop. it was 2am, so it could have been dark. guy with pretend gun object and cop with real gun. who's tough now? if the guy was using the lighter to trick the cop, then the guy didn't know the other guy was a cop, or he made a huge gamble. the lighter should have been in the guy's pocket or in his car. only the cop and the dead guy know the whole story if there were no witnesses or video recording. deadly force was justified only if the suspect appeared to be intent on using deadly force himself.
Posted by: GA | January 25, 2008 at 08:14 AM
Let's see... A man, at night, driving away from a lumber yard he's supposedly just robbed. Stops, and gets out of his vehicle, when he realizes he's being followed. And approaches the stopped car behind him while carrying an object that the officer, getting out of the patrol car to investigate the drivers earlier actions, believes is a weapon.
Because this is LA. The first thought the lone officer, MUST have is: This object is a Gun. The individual officer follows his ingrained training to save his life and possibly the lives of others in the neighborhood. Draws, and fires first. With his automatic service weapon. Firing as many times as necessary til the assailant is down. An act which probably took 4 tenths of a second.
Unmarked LA police cars are very obviously not civilian vehicles. Even at night, they are very easily identifiable. They have low profile, LED emergency lights on top and above the visor. Extra observation lights in the front. And large car ram on in front of the bumper. Even private security cars don't have this level of security accouterments.
All this, and the extremely omni-present Shotgun stored between the two front seats. Highly lit up by the interior lights of the patrol car. The minute the officer opened his car door should be a dead giveaway to the Suspect in the car in front. Which has been stopped, to stay inside his vehicle. and keep his hands on the wheel. Especially if all he's armed with is a lighter.
Instead he opts to be aggressive and approach the officers vehicle with something unidentifiable in his hands. Giving the Los Angeles Police Officer no choice but the one he made.
This suspects actions were ill conceived from the moment his vehicle was stopped. And he died as a result. I feel for the officer in the report.
Posted by: David Raun | May 08, 2008 at 03:04 PM