Replies

I didn't know that. So police officers that are after a suspect cannot use deadly force if he/she starts to run away?

In general, yes. There are specific exceptions that apply in certain cases, but cops do not have the right to start blasting away merely because someone's running from them.

Seems the odds are stacked in the criminal's favor if all our BP and police have to tackle every criminal just to apprehend them. There's nothing to stop every one from trying to flee then, either.

I'm about to shock you. Better sit down.

You have exactly as much right--no more, no less--to employ deadly force as a cop on duty does. Being a cop doesn't grant you extraordinary power of life and death merely because they're given a badge. Unless the officer has a specific and reasonable belief that the suspect poses an imminent danger to someone's life and limb, deadly force is not allowed.

The problem here is that (a) these guys got stupid, and (b) they lied about it, and destroyed evidence. The former is not necessarily criminal. The latter is, and demonstrates consciousness of guilt.

I'm about to shock you. Better sit down.

Luckily, I am usually sitting when at my computer ;-)

Unless the officer has a specific and reasonable belief that the suspect poses an imminent danger to someone's life and limb, deadly force is not allowed.

Now that I didn't know. It's not like TV at all then. Must make it exceedingly hard to catch anyone.

The problem here is that (a) these guys got stupid, and (b) they lied about it, and destroyed evidence. The former is not necessarily criminal. The latter is, and demonstrates consciousness of guilt.

I agree that they did something wrong, although exactly what I'm not sure. They shouldn't get off scott free (spelling?), but 5-20 years in prison seems excessive (unless there's much more to the story than is being reported). What really irks me is that a known criminal does get off scott-free, was given amnesty for testifying, and will now probably get millions of dollars for having his civil rights violated.

I think that's why this story has been enraging people, especially after all the talk of amnesty and the 'rights' of illegals. Illegals seem to have advantages the citizens don't get. We have to pay taxes, have insurance to drive, pay premiums and copays for medical insurance, are expected to obey every law or get fined/jailed. After all that, we have to pay taxes so the illegals can get all sorts of free-handouts we don't get. This story and it's implications came at an interesting time, so the lack of reporting of firing a weapon by the BP agents seems a small thing.

The problem here is that (a) these guys got stupid, and (b) they lied about it, and destroyed evidence. The former is not necessarily criminal. The latter is, and demonstrates consciousness of guilt.

If they had any guilt at all, it probably stemmed from fear of media and management persecution rather than having committed a crime.