[icwhatudo]

Whats interesting in Garner is this line: "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"

If, as the man who took the video stated, there was a fight on the ground and the man assaulted the officer and tried to take his weapon, (taser or otherwise), the officer could make the case that the standard of "committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape" had been met.

If you watch the video carefully, the shooting lasted only 2 1/2 seconds and there was a pause before the last shot and the man was clearly still running before the final shot took him down. Have to keep saying this: not defending at this point, just pointing out the law and the facts we know so far. To say this was simply a traffic stop and the man ran so he was shot for back child support is BS. People should be very careful. I remember a number of freepers defending Trayvon Martin and Mike Brown before all the facts were known.

[USNBandit]

The concept of shooting a fleeing suspect for committing a violent crime when there is no supportable evidence that he poses a continued threat is not the accepted standard. If the suspect grabbed the officer's weapon, taser, or baton and the officer shot the suspect in the process of that fight then that standard would be met.

Even if this DOJ opinion is correct the officer will find it difficult to meet that requirement.

[ansel12]

Then the police made a mistake when they watched the video and charged him with murder.