Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: dragnet2
There is a still photo from the phone showing the two on the ground, with the deceased on top of the cop. A female witness also said she saw a “tussle”.

Resisting arrest is a misdemeanor. Striking or assaulting a cop is a felony. (Although I have not heard of any injuries to the cop). In my state (Washington) the law says that you can shoot a person fleeing a felony. BUT - it sounds like the Supreme Court has overruled all of those types of laws.

However, just a few years ago, a private citizen shot a kid in the back (In WA state) that had broken in and was running away with a couple hundred bucks worth of stuff. So perhaps that wasn't just a “fleeing felon”, but seeing as the kid still had the stuff, was preventing the felony.

But what if Scott had stuck a knife in the cop - left the knife there, and ran away. No weapon on him anymore, so not an imminent risk to anyone (one could argue). Does that mean a cop can't shoot him as he is running away from a stabbing? I would find that hard to believe.

11 posted on 04/13/2015 1:12:52 AM PDT by 21twelve (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts It is happening again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: 21twelve

The Supremes haven’t said cops can’t shoot a fleeing suspect.

They said it may be justifiable if it was reasonable to believe the runner posed a risk of death or serious physical injury to the cop or others AND that shooting him was the only way to detain him.

Have yet to see evidence that either of these applied in this case. There have been (rare) cases where a civilian who killed a cop in a fight was found to have acted in self-defense.

I don’t know what happened, and neither does anybody else at this point except the cop in question.

But if the report is accurate that other cops were suspicious prior to the release of the video, it doesn’t look good for the shooter. Cops always give the benefit of the doubt, to put it mildly, to each other.

BTW, eyewitnesses should not be given too much credence. We should all remember what some of the eyewitnesses said about the Brown shooting. Eyewitness testimony is about the weakest type of evidence, though that’s not the way people think about it.

Which is why the video is so important. Shows (part of) what actually happened, not some random person’s recollection of it.


12 posted on 04/13/2015 1:41:41 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: 21twelve

in 1985 Tennesse v Garner narrowed the cases where police can shoot fleeing suspects from any fleeing felon to instances where “the officer reasonably believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the officer or others in the community.”


14 posted on 04/13/2015 2:07:01 AM PDT by Reverend Wright (Go Nigel !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: 21twelve
I just heard that directly after the shooting they gave the officer "days" to think about his version of the event, before he would need answer questions from investigators who were investigating the same event. Could you explain why they would ever do this?

Anyone?

33 posted on 04/13/2015 9:31:04 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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