Posted on 10/24/2019 6:50:00 PM PDT by BenLurkin
The surveillance camera footage, provided by attorney Stuart Chandler, shows 16-year-old Isiah Murrietta Golding climb a fence and enter a small yard as he is being chased by two officers.
Murrietta Golding, wearing a gray sweater, lands on his feet and starts to run. One officer climbs the fence while the other gets into a crouching stance and fires through the fence, the video shows. Murrietta Golding then stumbles and falls to the ground.
In the police body camera footage, also provided by the attorney, someone off camera can be heard saying "good shot."
The bullet went through the back of the teen's head, according to the father's lawsuit, and he died three days later. The lawsuit claims the officer who fired had no "objective facts" to believe that Murrietta Golding was armed or reaching for a weapon. The teen was unarmed, the lawsuit states.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Even in the old west, shooting anyone in the back was straight up Murder and you were Hanged.
You can, but you have to show he was likely a mortal danger to the community if allowed to run.
That cop deserves to be raped in prison for the rest of his life.
He doesnt have to have a weapon. First, you don’t get look at it with 20/20 hindsight. PC determination is objective, based on the perspective of a reasonable officer at the scene.
Second, if the officers had PC that he had committed a shooting the day before, Garner authorizes deadly force to prevent escape.
A lot of stupid people can’t read Garner for what it says.
If there is “probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used to prevent escape.”
Example, criminal goes to the 7-11 and shoots the clerk. Criminal runs out of the store. Criminal sees the police pulling up, and throws down his gun, but keeps running.
Garner says they can shoot that criminal, because the police have PC that the criminal has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.
I do think he should be removed from patrol duty. But then placed as a training officer on weapons accuracy. Face it, most cops empty their weapon having never getting even close to hitting their target. This guy John Wick the thief/murder suspect and should be passing on his skills to other officers. One less (probably illegal) dirtbag off the street.
No, it wasn’t you pathetic clown. The common law rule was that you could kill ANY escaping felon. That was the law in many States until 1985, when the Supreme Court tightened the rule to apply only to dangerous felons.
Do we have some refugees from DU who are soft on law and order here today?
“Stop or I’ll shoot” has been SOP for more than a hundred years. His brother admitted that he and his brother were involved in a homicide the day before. The streets are safer now with one less gang-banger. Saved the public the cost of his trial and incarceration.
I’m not sorry a killer is dead. Good shooting...
I will give massive leeway to any situation I see with cops with the assumption that there is a whole lot we didn’t see leading up to whatever 10 seconds of video the left takes out of context.
But I can’t find much in that video to take out of context. Almost all the possibilities lead directly to murder.
We had better find out that the kid shot at these cops a moment earlier and ditched the weapon or stabbed one of them or something and was too dangerous to let go.
But even at that... it was a killing of a running perp who was not posing an immediate threat. How could he be an immediate threat on the other side of that fence without a gun of his own?
And what the hell did that cop have for a backstop for that shot anyway? Looks like a house. Who else could have died?
If any single one of us took a shot like that in any state in the union we’d go to prison.
He’s a murderer and he will be judged.
He was heading into a child care center.
Summary executions might be representative of “order” but they are a poor example of law.
So he had his trial in the back of the police car before you scoop is that what you’re saying
I applaud the cop’s marksmanship but not his judgement.
Police Chief Andrew Hall:
“The City of Fresno has a policy not to comment on pending litigation, however in this case I feel it is necessary to make an exception.
I would like to ask the public not to rush to judgement. The video released yesterday is an officer involved shooting that occurred over 2 years ago. The use of lethal force in this case occurred while officers were investigating a homicide. The 16-year-old in this case was involved in the homicide with his brother and the brother was later arrested and pled guilty.
The video represents a different vantage point and was not what the pursuing officers could see. The 16 year-old was also known to carry firearms and had jumped a fence into a child daycare center.
The officer involved shooting was investigated by the Fresno Police Department ‘s Internal Affairs Bureau, the Fresno County District Attorney’s Office and the City of Fresno’s Office of Independent Review. All three reviews concluded that the use of lethal force was justified.
The ongoing judicial processes will take into consideration all of the factors involved in this officer involved shooting.”
You are such an expert. Amazing legal analysis.
Would you site the full title of the ‘85 SC decision.
Thanks
Thank you for your well reasoned and informative posts.
He’s already been cleared by the DA. No murder charges. Go cry.
Good shot.
A fleeing felon.
Common Law is the greatest invention of Britain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.