Mythos
Registered
You expecting it doesn’t make it right. There’s no reason to be gentle with someone who’s fleeing or fighting but deadly force? No. Courts are supposed to decide a suspect’s fate (after) he’s convicted. If he makes it to court that is. There are non lethal means with which to overcome and ‘capture’ a suspected criminal. From the beginning these cops erred in allowing him to drive away and park his car. Didn’t they have suspicion that he was DUI? If he had taken off or crashed, who would share greatly in that responsibility?
My expecting it is based on common sense and it just so happens, it also coincides with the law. I've searched it thoroughly, go ahead and have a look for yourself if you want.
The suspect committed no less than three felonies right in front of the police officers: assaulting officers, theft of a police weapon (yes, a taser is a deadly weapon) and fleeing the law. It is lawful for police to shoot in order to apprehend a felon where there is no other way to make that arrest.
It may be arguable if the suspect was an imminent threat to the police since he was running away after he assaulted them. The suspect was definitely an imminent threat to the public.
This had nothing to do with the cop administering punishment to a suspect. They were protecting themselves and the public. The courts will decide the cop's fate.
Last edited: