Shooting of Jacob Blake Explained by Former Secret Service Agent


Former secret service agent Dan Bongino explained on Jesse Watter’s show last night how it came to be that officers showed up at the home of Jacob Blake’s ex-girlfriend. Blake wasn’t breaking up a fight between two women.  Blake is a potential monster who was wanted for allegedly sexually assaulting the woman. He is a dangerous man. The Police Union has released previously unknown details of the shooting.


“Now the officers had responded to a domestic dispute by a woman who said her boyfriend was illegally on the premises. He had taken her keys and wasn’t giving them back.”

“Police were alerted that he had an active warrant out for a sexual assault and when they arrived on the scene they tried to take into custody,” he continued. “Blake resisted and began assaulting the officers. The officer tased him but that didn’t work. He escaped, opened his car door, and reached for something.”

As Blake reached into his car, an officer fired seven rounds, hitting Blake in the back. The Wisconsin Department of Justice revealed last week, after violence had already erupted, that Blake told police he had a knife in his possession.

The only question here for the officers is whether the police officer followed the guidelines legally and administratively for firing his gun.

Watch Dan Bongino:


This is the most important part of the police union statement:

Here are the actual and undisputed facts:

  • The officers were dispatched to the location due to a complaint that Mr. Blake was attempting to steal the caller’s keys/vehicle.
  • Officers were aware of Mr. Blake’s open warrant for felony sexual assault (3rd degree) before they arrived on scene.

• Mr. Blake was not breaking up a fight between two females when officers arrived on scene.

  • The silver SUV seen in the widely circulated video was not Mr. Blake’s vehicle.

Mr. Blake was armed:

  • Mr. Blake was not unarmed. He was armed with a knife. The officers did not see the knife initially. The officers first saw him holding the knife while they were on the passenger side of the vehicle. The “main” video circulating on the internet shows Mr. Blake with the knife in his left hand when he rounds the front of the car. The officers issued repeated commands for Mr. Blake to drop the knife. He did not comply.
  • The officers initially tried to speak with Mr. Blake, but he was uncooperative.
  • The officers then began issuing verbal commands to Mr. Blake, but he was non-complaint.
  • The officers next went “hands-on” with Mr. Blake, so as to gain compliance and control.
  • Mr. Blake actively resisted the officers’ attempt to gain compliance.
  • The officers then disengaged and drew their tasers, issuing commands to Mr. Blake that he would be tased if he did not comply.
  • Based on his non-compliance, one officer tased Mr. Blake. The taser did not incapacitate Mr. Blake.
  • The officers once more went “hands-on” with Mr. Blake; again, trying to gain control of the escalating situation.
  • Mr. Blake forcefully fought with the officers, including putting one of the officers in a headlock.
  • A second taser (from a different officer than had deployed the initial taser) was then deployed on Mr. Blake. It did not appear to have any impact on him.
  • Based on the inability to gain compliance and control after using verbal, physical and less- lethal means, the officers drew their firearms.
  • Mr. Blake continued to ignore the officers’ commands, even with the threat of lethal force now present.

The foregoing facts need to be added to the story to correct what is currently out there. As the uncontested facts above demonstrate, the officers involved gave Mr. Blake numerous opportunities to comply. He chose not to. None of the officers involved wished for things to transpire the way it did. It is my hope that truth and transparency will help begin and aid in the healing process.”

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

1 Comment
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments