SC police officer charged with murder

[BWT]

If a slow motion and enhanced view of the video or video's hold up what appears to be happening, then I would not call it roasting him. I would call it justice. Because he is an officer means he should and probably would get an enhanced sentence. The days of police using a throwdown weapon or manipulating evidence to justify killing someone should be long gone. It didn't appear that he was doing police work, but the LORDS work.

I haven't watched the video but it appears reports are that a Police Officer was in a physical confrontation; the man was fighting him for his taser. Lost, and fled. While running the police officer shot the man who subsequently perished due to injuries.

I'm with the LE guys; I think it's a bad shoot but my opinion means little.

Unrelated, what do you mean by the Lord's work?

Shooting fleeing criminals?

I'm not losing my cool or flipping out but that's... A poor choice of words. I'm saying this in hopes of understanding the context/meaning. Google revealed lots of daily devotionals.

[Chuck Haggard]

That struck me as odd as well JOG, please clarify.



I'll note that the officer even, if you listen to the tempo of shots, appears to be throwing a last "fuck you" round into his string of fire.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That last shot and the pause before - didn't think of that before. There is a civilian case where a pause in the cadence of fire - bang, bang ------- pause ---- bang, let to the charge of premeditation. The prosecution argued that there was enough time to see that the threat was stopped and thus the shot after the pause was a premeditated plan to kill. Even a small pause was enough as the shooter had time to evaluate.

[Chuck Haggard]

For the record, even if dude still had his Taser then this is a bad shoot. One can not articulate a reasonable fear of a continuing threat to the public from the guy having a Taser.

[ssb]

For the record, even if dude still had his Taser then this is a bad shoot. One can not articulate a reasonable fear of a continuing threat to the public from the guy having a Taser.

Expanding on this a bit:

If there was indeed a struggle over the taser, would an officer be justified in using deadly force against the assailant during that struggle? Put another way: would the legal outcome be different if the officer had shot during that struggle?

[Chuck Haggard]

Expanding on this a bit:

If there was indeed a struggle over the taser, would an officer be justified in using deadly force against the assailant during that struggle? Put another way: would the legal outcome be different if the officer had shot during that struggle?

I think so, yes. Lets say dude did a disarm of the officer's Taser, can the cop articulate from his training and likely Taser exposure shot, that he would be incapacitated if the guy was to get a good shot with the Taser into him, and thus be open for a gun disarm? Lets say the officer deflects the Taser away from him momentarily and gets his gun drawn to a high 2 and starts shooting. I think he is in good shape legally.

I know of a case in OK where the cop was jumped for his gun, bad guy doesn't get it at first so he disarms the officer of his OC spray and sprays him in the face, officer gets his pistol deployed and shoots bad guy, bad guy dies, case was "no true bill" in front of the grand jury and civil action was fruitless for the family of the dead guy later.

[Fly320s]

For the record, even if dude still had his Taser then this is a bad shoot. One can not articulate a reasonable fear of a continuing threat to the public from the guy having a Taser.

If the suspect had an unfired Taser and pointed it at the officer, would that justify lethal force?

I would think that it would, because the Taser could render the officer incapable of defending himself, which would allow the suspect to grab the officer's gun or use direct force on the officer.

[Corlissimo]

For the record, even if dude still had his Taser then this is a bad shoot. One can not articulate a reasonable fear of a continuing threat to the public from the guy having a Taser.

Not wanting to derail the thread, but your point has made me curious about whether one could argue that the if the victim DID have the taser then the threat to the Officer is there? To wit: If said "Officer" is tased and temporarily disabled, he could be killed with his own weapon, or that weapon could be taken and used on the public. Valid reasoning, or, am I off base?


BTW: I'm in full agreement with the prevailing views that this "Officer" is 100% in the wrong and that the criminal charges against him are justified. I feel for his family and friends, as well as those of the victim, regardless of his actions leading up to his death.

[Chuck Haggard]

The officer doesn't start shooting until dude is already headed to the outside of Taser range, I wouldn't be able to justify that at all if I was called in as an expert in this case. At any rate I'd have at least waited until guy tried to turn on me with the Taser before I started shooting, and yes, I am well aware of the action/reaction times involved. I'm also aware that even with trained officers using the device an extended range Taser use is effective less than 50% of the time.

If dude escapes with the Taser, the deadly threat to the public is what?

How about keep dude in sight during a foot pursuit while you get other units in route with a quickness via that radio you are carrying?

One of the things you need for a legit deadly force use is preclusion, you had no other safe or reasonable alternative at that moment.

[Chuck Haggard]

If the suspect had an unfired Taser and pointed it at the officer, would that justify lethal force?

I would think that it would, because the Taser could render the officer incapable of defending himself, which would allow the suspect to grab the officer's gun or use direct force on the officer.

Agreed.