Depriving People Of Due Process
BY Herschel Smith
3 years, 7 months ago
Via David Codrea, this report from Maryland involving an off-duty Pentagon Police Officer.
After they arrived the officers were approached by an off duty PFPA officer who stated that he had fired his service weapon at suspects, saying they fled after not obeying his commands when he confronted them for what he believed was an in-progress car break-in.
The two victims, Williams and Johnson, were transported to Prince George Hospital where they later died from gunshot wounds, the Takoma Park Police said.
In Tennessee versus Garner, the Supreme Court has said that people fleeing the scene (even if known that it was the scene of a crime, in the particular case, escaped inmates) cannot be subject to lethal force.
You cannot shoot people for fleeing. It couldn’t be clearer.
Not that this man cared about due process, but the point is that by taking a life, you deprive that person of their due process rights. You’ve become judge, jury and executioner.
On April 9, 2021 at 12:57 pm, Chris Mallory said:
What else could he do? Those two did not ‘respect my authoritah’, so shooting them dead was the only thing a reasonable government employee could do.
(Please realize this is sarcasm)
On April 9, 2021 at 2:28 pm, Whynot said:
Both LA and TX allow (used to?? my time has been awhile) for police to shoot at fleeing felons IF they believe serious threat to the themselves or public exist.
This is in accordance with said Tennessee v Garner – per a brief “ The U.S. Supreme Court held that deadly force cannot be used against a fleeing suspect unless the suspect poses a serious threat to the officer or others.”
On April 9, 2021 at 2:57 pm, Herschel Smith said:
@Whynot,
Yes, I’m aware. One of the decisions by Scalia with which I don’t entirely agree.
I think that should be a highly informed and very high bar.
On April 9, 2021 at 3:27 pm, SGT.BAG said:
Innocence, Imminence, Avoidance, Proportionality and Reasonableness.
His due diligence is lacking in all categories.
On April 9, 2021 at 3:28 pm, GomeznSA said:
Herschel – afaik the law in Texas has not changed in the decade plus that I moved back here. So yes, one ‘can’ shoot to stop a fleeing felon BUT you had darn well better be able to articulate facts that would show that said felon presents a clear and discernible danger. Something like he is armed and is shooting at innocents or maybe trying to jack a car. If you can’t state those facts, try to keep them in sight and let the on duty coppers take the appropriate action.
On April 9, 2021 at 3:55 pm, Okanogan Offgrid said:
Enforcers today don’t care about due process. It’s all about their “right” to go home safe at the end of the day.
On April 9, 2021 at 5:28 pm, Fred said:
Takoma Overlook Condominiums on New Hampshire Avenue in MD.
On April 9, 2021 at 9:43 pm, Blake said:
We already know the law is unequally applied with civilian versus police shootings. It is ridiculous that I, as an armed citizen, am held to a higher standard than a supposedly highly trained expert!
On April 9, 2021 at 10:32 pm, Jimmy the Saint said:
You peasants have a license to do only what we permit you to do, and only for so long as we permit you to do it. And we know you’re ok with it, because the harder we push you, the less you do about it.
– The Government
On April 10, 2021 at 9:42 am, George 1 said:
“Not that this man cared about due process, but the point is that by taking a life, you deprive that person of their due process rights. You’ve become judge, jury and executioner.”
Which is why all of the LEO shooting policies that I have ever heard of, call for deadly force application ONLY when your life or the life of another person is in imminent danger.
Just running from a crime scene does not normally rise to that level. Of course climbing through a window does not either.
On April 11, 2021 at 10:00 am, Chris Mallory said:
George,
But that “life in danger” has been warped by the cops to mean a citizen is merely holding a weapon, might be holding a weapon, is holding something, has a weapon within 1 mile of his current location, is behind a closed door and the cop hears a loud noise, or the serf had contempt of cop.
On April 11, 2021 at 2:32 pm, George 1 said:
@ Chris Mallory. You are right. Language has become quite imprecise these days. Definition creep is always in play. Imminent danger used to mean, well, imminent danger. As in immediate intent and means to cause great bodily harm or death. Not possible danger, not could be danger, not he might have a weapon and not he might want to hurt me.
However we no longer live in a place where government officials are expected to use good judgement or follow written policy. I maintain that many, if not most, of these outrageous shootings involving police that we see today are due to simple cowardice.