Supreme Court’s decision in Tennessee v. Garner 471 U.S.1 involved a pair of police officers who shot a 15-year-old boy as he fled from a burglary. (He’d stolen $10 and a purse from a house.) The court ruled law enforcement couldn’t shoot every felon who tried to escape. What’s “objectively reasonable” changes as the circumstances change. The moment they no longer present a threat, you need to stop shooting” Supreme Court Justice Klinger said. Officers can’t justify their conduct based on whether their intentions were good. They have to demonstrate their actions were “objectively reasonable,” given the circumstances.
The Supreme Court Justices held deadly force “may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead… however…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.
Video evidence released today demonstrates De’Von Bailey was not presenting any threat to the officers who shot and killed him while he attempted to flee. In addition, there is not a shred of evidence De’Von presented an imminent threat or risk that he was imminently about to use a gun to harm anyone else. Instead, it is clear De’Von was merely trying to get away from the situation. Even if the officers had legitimate concern a suspect might escape, the law strictly specifies it is only when the officers have evidence a person is in imminent risk of death or serious bodily harm may an officer use deadly force, a gun, to stop a person from fleeing.”
Lawrence Stoker, Bailey’s cousin said he was the other suspect in the robbery call and was at the scene when Bailey was shot. “He got shot at least three, four times. We did not rob anyone and Bailey did not reach for a gun. Instead, Bailey tried to run away. He didn’t get more than two feet away … and (police) started shooting. He didn’t turn around and grab his pocket or anything.” According to autopsy results, Bailey was shot four times: three times in the back and once in his arm.
Lawrence Stoker, was questioned after the shooting. Stocker didn’t know his cousin had a gun until it fell out of the pocket of his basketball shorts as he lay motionless in the street AFTER being shot. Three witnesses back up the cousin’s account as does the video from a home security system showing and police bodycam video EXACTLY what happened.
Lawrence Stoker, Bailey’s cousin was questioned after the shooting. Stocker didn’t know his cousin had a gun until it fell out of the pocket of his basketball shorts as he lay motionless in the street AFTER being shot. Three witnesses back up the cousin’s account as does the video from a home security system showing EXACTLY what happened.
Also while questioning Stoker the police continually attempted to spin the narrative.
COUSIN DISPUTES POLICE ACCOUNT, CLAIMS 19-YEAR-OLD WAS ARMED BUT DIDN’T REACH FOR WEAPON
Know Your 4th Amendment Rights
Human Rights Advocate, Researcher/Chronological Archivist and member in good standing with the Constitution First Amendment Press Association (CFAPA.org)