Listen to the officer's tone of voice ordering the victim to get his license. The cop was excited then. He had already made the decision to shoot if the victim moved quickly, but the same excited tone of voice told the victim that he had better obey immediately.
The cop and his apologists can't have it both ways. If he wanted the man to move slowly, he should have said so. His tone of voice said he demanded instant obedience.
This cop should not have been on the street, period. He was a bomb waiting to go off. I completely agree with the poster you quoted:
"Then perhaps the departments need to have officers involved in legitimate shootings cleared by a department psychiatrist before returning to duty."For the record, I have @ 800 hours experience in police brutality litigation, and @ 40 hours in reviewing, for my state, the propriety of shootings by police officers.
Letting this officer back on the street was negligence by his superiors. His degree of prior stress is not a factor in his potential criminal liability for shooting the victim, but would be a factor in sentencing.
His law enforcement career is over. No law enforcement officer can safely employ him in a sworn capacity.
I agree that the officers career is over. He acted improperly and did not maintain control of the situation.
The victim, out of self-defense, should have taken it upon himself to move more slowly. Not that he was obligated to do that, but just from common sense.
However, only $285,000 award? That seems small for all the victim went through.