Fatal shooting of man by police raises some troubling questions

RICHMOND TIMES DISPATCH ^ | Sunday, November 17, 2002 | MARK HOLMBERG

[Ground0]

"Your papers, Comrade!" What about the first few lines of the story?

If he had matched the description of the suspect...if the gun had his fingerprints on it...no independent witnesses...no court history of violent behavior...(Most telling of all) shot in the back at point blank range...which would probably explain why the weapon wound up 35 feet away.

This action is defensable in your opinion? Maybe the now deceased "perp" carried a weapon for fear of such an attack by a "peace officer."

Whatever the situation, the verifiable facts described in the article would certainly raise "reasonable doubt" in a court of law...if it ever got that far; but it didn't.

Do I distrust "law enforcement?" You bet, especially in light if this instance.

Are you in favor of vigilante justice or due process? What was your opinion on the Clinton/Lewinsky "he said, she said" dispute? At least she was able to draw a breath to say SOMETHING.

We have certain rights in this country to defend the general public from such deadly reprocussions of mistken identity as in this case.

As has been said in the past, "Riding the fence is a dangerous and painful endeavor," so on which side do you fall?

With all due respect, Ground0.

[toddst]

We have certain rights in this country to defend the general public from such deadly reprocussions of mistken identity as in this case.

OK, let's go 'round again. The suspect was asked for his ID and refused in a seriously threatening manner - he drew a gun. In the struggle the police officer apparently knocked the gun out of the suspect's hand and (I believe)shot him in the back at point-blank range. I doubt the officer knew the suspect had lost his grip on the gun and fired believing if the suspect was able to turn toward him he would have shot the officer.

This all happened in a few seconds of desperate struggle, while the officer was fighting for his life. It's WAY too easy to second-guess the officer later, while we sit in a quiet place facing no threat whatever.

If a citizen is challenged by a police officer it is wise to do exactly what that officer directs him to do. Any other action in inherently dangerous - period. This specific confrontation went badly, with no way to fully verify the details of the encounter. However, I still land on the officer's side, given the actual circumstances of the situation.