Yes. And no. It used to be that the burden of proof was on the cop to prove that he had reason to believe that the fleeing felon rule should apply. What made him think that the escaping guy was a danger. Now the situation has flipped. You have to prove the cop knew the guy wasn’t dangerous. Giving the cop the benefit of the doubt in questionable situations became taking their word as gospel.
There was a discussion in the Waffle House threat wherein I correctly stated that a citizen would have been justified to shoot the mass-murderer in order to prevent his escape IF that was the only available option. Other members of this forum stated that I was wrong and that a citizen or even a cop would be prosecuted since the mass-murderer was running away. I tried to explain to them, to no avail, that it would be reasonable use of force since it was plainly evident that the killer posed a mortal threat to others. The Supreme Court permits such use of force. None of twats that said I was wrong had the integrity to visit this thread and acknowledge that they were wrong.
Well there you are mixing apples and oranges. The cop may have the authority but the citizen does not. Citizens have been charged before for shooting someone who is fleeing. The citizens right to use force is in self defense, or defense of another from imminent threat. The Castle Doctrine for example, does not give me the right to chase a burglar down, or shoot him in the yard when he’s fled the house. It means I can stand my own ground, without the legal requirement to retreat. It does not give me the right to pursue, or shoot someone who is fleeing. The argument that he had shot and killed four people does not mean he is an imminent threat to anyone else after he is disarmed, and fleeing. You might win in court, perhaps even probably win, but you would likely be charged.
So the citizens in the Waffle House if they had shot the moron while he was fleeing, would probably be charged. Depending on the state’s laws.
I am unaware of similar cases, but there are plenty of examples of fleeing burglars and those all add up to no consistent rule. Seriously. It depends on a lot of things.
Can One Shoot A Fleeing Robber?
I’d advise you to join some of the organizations out there, like USCCA and have a lawyer available in such an instance. When the cops show up, don’t say anything but your name, address, and point out the evidence. Then ask for your lawyer. Because it is likely you will talk your way into prison if you aren’t absolutely sure about what the law says, and what you are doing.
I’ve been a member of USCCA for years now. I’ve come up with scenarios and situations in which I would be comfortable shooting, and able to defend the action before the law. The person running away, isn’t really one of those situations. Then again, I hadn’t considered a murderer dropping his weapon and fleeing. But here is the rub, if he’s gone, then the immediate threat to me and others is gone too. With that departure, the justification for shooting becomes far more murky.
