I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.
Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?
He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.
The man, 50-year old Walter Scott had a warrant for non-payment of child support and apparently ran to avoid going to jail on that charge. Did the police have the right to shoot him to prevent his escape? The law is clear they did not.. The police can use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only if the suspect is a dangerous felon. This means that the suspect has either inflicted or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm. Scott was not a dangerous felon by any stretch of the imagination, and the use of deadly force against him was criminal.
In
Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) examined a Tennessee State statute which allowed the police to use deadly force against ALL fleeing felony suspects. The SCOTUS found the Tennessee statute to be unconstitutional, ruling that deadly force could only be used to prevent the escape of a dangerous felon. The following are pertinent portions of the Supreme Court's Court's findings (highlights are my own):
“
The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead. The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects.”
“
However, it is not unconstitutional on its face. Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. As applied in such circumstances, the Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster.”
Tennessee v. Garner Cop Block
I hope that answers your question.
