16 rounds, when there was no imminent threat, is going to send this officer away for long time.
...
Based on what law or precedent?
If it’s in line with his training, Supreme court decisions, or testimony from experts about such situations, he’ll be exonerated as most officers in these cases are.
The city has already settled with the family.
I am usually on the side of protecting the cop from the Hands up, don’t shoot crowd. I don’t understand why these punks don’t follow directions.
That said, I’ve heard no one suggest this cop was even a little bit in the right.
The trial will tell.
I thought Freeper’s would be familiar with the Tuelle Rule. The guy was high on PCP, had shrugged off a taser, was swinging a knife, had just prior slashed a tire of police car when an officer tried to arrest him, was walking parallel to the police, not away, and was shot when he turned toward police with a knife in his hand and while reaching in a pocket. This isn’t close to murder 1. It may or may not have been a good shoot according to police procedures. The truth of that matter depends on a lot of details that aren’t in that particular film. Frankly, we are spending far too much time and too many resources on our feral population.
That’s just it. I don’t think it’s in line with standard lethal force training. I got my CC training from a cop, and self-control, recognizing where you were in terms of real versus imagined threat, was on you, the shooter. They even provided an option for simulation training, again, the point being, when and why do you start shooting, when and why do you stop. You have to think about that and practice that ahead of time, because in the live shooting situation, you’re going to play the tape of how you’ve practiced.
So I say, based on the training I received, no way was this recognized internally as a good shoot. If it was held back, it almost certainly was for political reasons, not because they were unsure about the deviance of this shoot from acceptable standards.
As for the law, unloading the entire magazine in a situation like this is probably going to be a factor, because it speaks to the shooter’s state of mind. Someone above said there was a pause. If so, he’s probably doomed. He just demonstrated he had enough self control to assess the risk, and despite objective evidence the threat was neutralized, he kept on shooting. A jury could infer he truly meant to kill a man who was no longer a threat to him. No comfort I can find in the law for that.
Peace,
SR
Exactly. Once deadly force is decided, the number of shots is really moot. Oh, wait, it’s “excessive” to kill someone more than you already did....sheesh
Based on training and policies and procedures. LEOs are very familiar with the minimum response concept. 16 rounds is a gross violation of that concept in this case.
The guy is going to jail for life. The city settled for 5 million. The guy had 18 complaints, including a previous one that cost the city 350k. He should have been fired a long time ago.
Good cops are going to get killed because of loons like that guy.