Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tilted Irish Kilt

“whether or not there was “probable cause”
for the police officer to use “deadly physical force”
to defend himself from immenent deadly physical force”

Nope there is more to it than that. If, as reported, Michael Brown struggled to control Officer Wilsons weapon or even touched his sidearm then this applies.

Per Judge White SCOTUS majority decision:

Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. As applied in such circumstances, the Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster.


11 posted on 09/17/2014 6:35:15 PM PDT by oldenuff2no (Retired military dog handler)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: oldenuff2no
oldenuff2no ".. there is more to it than that. If, as reported, Michael Brown struggled to control Officer Wilsons weapon
or even touched his sidearm then this applies."

True that ! ,
However, after the first autopsy examinations, all residuals would have been removed for toxicology examination, and wouldnt be avialable for subsequent investigations.
If Micheal Brown fought with me for possession of my handgun and resulted in discharge of the handgun in my car, after already having aready been assualted by the 'perp'
I would already be Pi$$ed enough that I would shoot the perp without thought of legal ramifications.

18 posted on 09/17/2014 7:14:33 PM PDT by Tilted Irish Kilt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson