How Fast? The Ernesto Sepulveda Incident

This is another posting in a series where I explore just how fast a criminal attack can happen through analyzing actual video-recorded events. One of the critical challenges both police and private citizens face when confronted with a criminal attack is recognizing what is happening and then reacting fast enough to respond effectively. This is not trivial since the attack is often underway before a defender even realizes that there is a problem. Even if the defender has a planned response, the speed of the attack can often prevent them from effectively responding in time.

On 5 July 2025, uniformed LAPD Gang Enforcement Detail officers observed Ernesto Sepulveda, riding a bicycle north on the sidewalk in 3900 block of South Western Avenue. The officers, believing that Sepulveda possessed a handgun, initiated a pedestrian stop.

When the officers asked Sepulveda if he was carrying a gun, he turned and fled from the officers. As he ran, Sepulveda drew a 9mm pistol from his waistband and fired multiple shots at the officers, grazing one officer’s cheek and striking him in the legs. Sepulveda continued to run and fired an additional round at other officers as they closed on him. Sepulveda’s pistol malfunctioned and he threw the weapon away while continuing to run from police. Pursuing officers eventually caught Sepulveda and took him into custody. The officer Sepulveda shot was treated for the wounds to his cheek and legs and hospitalized in stable condition.

If you are not familiar with COL Boyd’s Observe, Orient, Decide, Act cycle, it is worth reviewing. In a previous article in this series, I discussed the OODA framework and how it applies to armed encounters.*

Sepulveda Starting his draw

So how much time did it take for Sepulveda to draw and fire his pistol? His draw from the time he initiated the movement to the moment he fired at the first officer was 1.360 seconds.

The Moment the Officer Could Have Seen Sepulveda's Pistol

From the moment the officer could have initially seen the pistol until Sepulveda fired the first shot was 0.280 seconds. We can find ourselves in circumstances where there is no possibility of reacting to a deadly threat in time to prevent the assault. The officer is fortunate in that he only received a graze wound to the cheek rather than a hit to the head.

Sepulveda Fires With His Back To The Officer

 

 

Also of note: If we assume the officer could have reacted in time to prevent Sepulveda’s assault, the officer’s shots would have likely struck Sepulveda in the back. The value of body camera videos is apparent in this context since numerous police officers have been charged for shooting suspects in the back. Just because a suspect’s back is turned, it does not mean he is incapable of posing a deadly threat.

If you enjoy reading these please subscribe. The link is on the upper right side of the page. Your information will never be distributed.

* https://www.sensibleselfdefenseblog.com/2025/05/driveway-assault-how-fast-can-it-happen.html

* For an in-depth discussion of Boyd’s OODA framework: https://www.artofmanliness.com/character/behavior/ooda-loop/

Road Rage -- Stupid Behavior Changes Multiple Lives Forever

On 1 July 2025, stupid behavior changed multiple lives forever. Dustin Jackson was driving a GMC Sierra pickup truck with his 6-year-old daughter. Another individual, Steven Bevan, was on the same road driving a Dodge Challenger with his 9-year-old and 8-year-old sons. Jackson and Bevan encountered each other in the left turn lane at Warner Road in Tempe, Arizona while they waited for the light to change.

The Incident

Jackson told police that he was behind Bevan when the light turned green and that he honked when Bevan did not move. This delay caused both to wait through another light cycle. At the next green light, Jackson and Bevan turned left and entered different lanes. Jackson told police that Bevan then swerved into his lane, brake checked him and stopped in front of him, about 400 feet from the previous intersection.

Witnesses at the scene and Jackson told police that Bevan got out of his Challenger and was yelling with his hands up. In a statement to police, Jackson explained that he reached for his pistol (a Springfield Hellcat 9mm) as Bevan exited his vehicle and began to approach him and his daughter. Jackson told police that he pointed his pistol at Bevan through his windshield as Bevan approached. 

Jackson stated that as Bevan came closer to his vehicle, he opened the driver's side door and said that he observed Bevan use his right hand to reach around his back. Jackson said that when Bevan reached around his back, that he fired one shot, striking Bevan in the chest. Jackson stated he attempted to call 9-1-1 to report the incident but could not get through to an operator. Police reported that a search of Bevan and his vehicle did not discover any weapon. 

Tempe Police arrested Jackson and charged him with first-degree murder and drive-by shooting.(1) The court set a one million dollar secured appearance bond for Jackson.

Police recovered a video that one of Bevan’s children recorded which captured part of the incident. Statements from witnesses at the scene and this video were apparently key in the subsequent Grand Jury proceeding which returned “No True Bill” on the murder and drive-by shooting charges against Jackson. It is not clear who/whether Jackson was represented at the grand jury hearing; however, the video likely corroborated his account of the incident.(2)

But Wait! Bevan Didn’t Have a Gun

Arizona law, like that of many states contains a provision for acting in response to apparent danger. Arizona jury instructions contain the following:

A.R.S. §§ 13-404 and -405, apparent deadly force can be met with deadly force, so long as defendant’s belief as to apparent deadly force is a reasonable one. An instruction on self-defense is required when a defendant acts under a reasonable belief; actual danger is not required. (3)

Apparent danger is often the result of a furtive movement. A furtive movement is a suspicion provoking movement that (under the totality of circumstances) is consistent with accessing a weapon but is not reasonably consistent with doing something else. The totality of the circumstances is the key element. It would be a gross overreaction to draw a weapon while standing in a cash register line at a store when the person in front of you reached for their wallet. Their actions would be consistent with paying for merchandise given the totality of the circumstances.

However, if someone who is verbally threatening and acting in an aggressive manner suddenly begins an action that is consistent with drawing a pistol, that reasonably would justify the use of force or deadly force—even if it is later found (as in this case) that the person had no weapon.

Road Rage

Road rage has become a daily and potentially dangerous plague on America’s streets. Although it seldom results in anything more than traded curses and obscene gestures, it can occasionally escalate into extreme acts violence as we saw in the above incident. A 2019, AAA Aggressive Driving Survey reported that within the preceding 30 days, 57 million drivers reported that they had switched lanes quickly/or very close to another car. Another 71 million drivers reported that they had made rude gestures or honked at other drivers.

How Should You Respond to Road Rage?

Unfortunately, it does not look like this problem is going away any time soon. Regardless of whether the fault is truly yours or not, if you find that you have agitated another driver do not react to the other driver or retaliate. Bevan reacted to someone honking at him. His reaction and subsequent behavior in stopping in front of another vehicle eventually caused the situation to escalate and spiral out of his control.

Control your emotions. While it may be difficult in the heat of the moment, do not give in to feelings of anger or rage on the road. Think twice before you honk the horn or flip that finger—you never know what may set off someone in the cars around you nor how they might react. Avoid eye contact and continue to practice safe driving habits. Getting home in one piece is far more important than venting your frustration or trying to teach someone a dangerous lesson.

If you enjoy reading these please subscribe. The link is on the upper right side of the page. All that will happen is that you will receive an e-mail when I post an article. Your information will never be distributed.

(1) A.R.S. § 13-1209 criminalizes the crime of “drive by shooting” in Arizona. A drive by shooting occurs when an individual intentionally shoots a weapon from a car at either a person, another car, or an occupied structure. For a crime to be classified as a drive by shooting, the discharge of the weapon must have been intentional, and it must have been aimed directly at a person or at a car or house where a person is likely to be located.

(2) No True Bill means the grand jury did not find sufficient evidence to justify bringing charges against an individual. Per the Jason D. Lamm law firm’s website: “Arizona has a unique law that allows a criminal defense attorney to represent a person under investigation in presenting exculpatory evidence to a grand jury. Specifically, the law requires that the prosecution summarizes all clearly exculpatory evidence that the person under investigation wants the grand jury to consider, and that the prosecution advises the grand jury of the desire of the person under investigation to testify.”

(3) Revised Arizona Jury instructions (Criminal) 6th Edition, 2022