Daniel Shaver shooting vid (NSFW)

[glocktogo]

Was not intended to be an equal analogy, just an example where no weapon has been identified, the (potential) threat warned of the consequences of continuing, and making the call to shoot vs wait and find out. I'm sure situations like that arrived. What if the guy who was doing that as found to have no bomb on him? Would his behavior leading the person to shoot constitute "reasonable belief of serious bodily harm/death your life was in danger" ? It was as much a Q as a (seemingly poor) example of there being a justified time to use lethal force yet not a positive ID of threat per se in mil setting.

Per usual, the totality of the circumstances dictate the conclusion. In the OP example, no one here supports the "reasonable belief of serious bodily harm/death your life was in danger" response by the shooter, yet I do not expect LEO to wait until they have positively ID a weapon before using lethal force in all situations.

Anyway, not my lane, so I will leave to LEOs and mil to debate.

No I get it and you're correct, a reasonable person having a belief that the subject constitutes an immediate threat of death or great bodily harm is the standard. Just keep in mind that the closer you are to the line, the greater the likelihood that a jury won't agree.

[WillBrink]

No I get it and you're correct, a reasonable person having a belief that the subject constitutes an immediate threat of death or great bodily harm is the standard. Just keep in mind that the closer you are to the line, the greater the likelihood that a jury won't agree.

As it should be.

[noonesshowmonkey]

Done.

[Firefly]

There's a lot of jib jab in here from folks that aren't in the bidness. People need to settle into their seats and let the adults talk.

The only opinions that matter (are informed through education and experience) in this are those of educated professionals (lawyers, LEOs, etc.) or someone with the titular 'Justice', as in, 'Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg'.

If you haven't familiarized yourself yet with the actual source documentation for how these situations are taken apart legally, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center has a lovely .pdf that covers the basics. (Big shout out to JPMuscle for the link to such a concise document!) The two key pieces of casework on the subject--both contained within the previously linked .pdf and sub-listed here as separate .pdf's--are Graham V. Connor and Tennessee V. Garner. The former establishes a standard of 'reasonableness' related to a use of force or seizure (which killing a man is a seizure of his life), and the latter applies a 'totality of circumstances' model to any seizure, and particularly to the use of deadly force on a fleeing suspect. Give them a read.

I strap a weapon to my body, throw on a IIIa vest, and sally forth almost every damned day into what is per capita in the top 3 most violent city in the country. Nota bene: opinions are my own, do not represent my agency, or the institution of the The Police.

When I first encountered this incident, my partner was playing the video from the passenger seat while I was finishing a report. At first, I thought that it was cop-on-cop punking; cops making fun of other dumb fudd cops. Then, it kept going, and I thought, 'maybe this is a training video where the instructor is showing everyone how little he knows...', which, if you're in the bidness, is highly plausible. Finally, it struck me. 'Holy shit, this is real.' Then, I watched a compliant, unarmed citizen get burned down in a hotel hallway.

I expect an appeal in this case, and I would not be surprised if this one marches it's way up the ladder to the Supreme Court for that oh so valuable opinion. Or, if you did your homework, you will look at the reasonableness and totality of circumstances and see and that appeal will likely die before it gets to the Supreme Court, which will overturn the holding of the lower court.

That's all interesting and cute, but the Rodney King officers walked too until they caught some Fed charges.

There's the objective reasonableness standard being glossed over.

"What did he know and when did he know it" won't fly like it used to. Juries can get instructed of a lot of things that may have influenced how this played out

Seeing as how the officer was fired, they know they will likely lose the civil case.
Seen it personally on another shooting over drugs that had way less disturbing bideo than this. Guy caught an MP5 burst while prone due to an officer having a ND.

I almost expect this to set a new standard in compliance training.

While the officer who shot was wrong the SGT had scene command and sounded like a rookie just out of FTO giving some of the dumbest verbal commands I thought I'd never hear. That's the guy who has a lot of vicarious liability (important word if you ever wear stripes) as he is responsible for everything that happened.

This case is not over by a damn sight.

But these are things you notice after 15 years.

I really, really hope you never get put in such a situation. People lose homes over suits like this.

[LowSpeed_HighDrag]

I have avoided giving my opinion on this, and I think I still will.

Two things though...

Non Police Officers: Try your best to comply with orders from the Police, whether you agree or not. The best place to argue and fight is the courtroom. If you are going to render public opinions on police work, try to at least read some case law first.

Police Officers: Get it out of your heads that an OIS is somehow cool or badass. It will wreck you in ways you do not understand, whether it was justified or not. Also, give clear, concise, and easy to follow verbal commands. Know what you are going to say ahead of time, and train on it. Don't ever become that cop (that we all know) that thinks he is better than non police officers and sees everyone as a threat. We are helpers, who sometimes are sadly forced to take lives.

[Turnkey11]

I will never comply to a "cross your legs, hands in the air, and crawl" command, ever. That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard, and not how I was trained or how I trained anyone afterwards. I hope people see this and become completely non-compliant once they are on the ground with their arms out to their sides, palms up, and feet crossed. Do not get up, do not move, he says move, tell him to come get you and wait. Nobody should die the way that kid did in that video.

[chuckman]

I will never comply to a "cross your legs, hands in the air, and crawl" command, ever. That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard, and not how I was trained or how I trained anyone afterwards. I hope people see this and become completely non-compliant once they are on the ground with their arms out to their sides, palms up, and feet crossed. Do not get up, do not move, he says move, tell him to come get you and wait. Nobody should die the way that kid did in that video.

It was a bizarre, macabre game of Simon says, with a pre-determined outcome.

[LowSpeed_HighDrag]

I will never comply to a "cross your legs, hands in the air, and crawl" command, ever. That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard, and not how I was trained or how I trained anyone afterwards. I hope people see this and become completely non-compliant once they are on the ground with their arms out to their sides, palms up, and feet crossed. Do not get up, do not move, he says move, tell him to come get you and wait. Nobody should die the way that kid did in that video.

This is the first video that I've ever seen this technique used. I've worked for two agencies, learned three different DTAC disciplines, and have never seen anything other than lay on your belly, put your arms out to your sides like you are flying, cross ankles (or spread legs), palms up to the sky, look away from me, do not move. Even in felony stops or an active burg in a dark hallway where I need you to come to me, you will walk backwards with hands in the air until I tell you to stop, then go to your knees while I cuff and search.

To a certain extent I agree with you, if the orders become so FUBAR'd that you cant follow them, just prone with hands deliberately out to your sides and stay put. You may get bean-bagged, but you probably wont get shot.

[chuckman]

There's a lot of jib jab in here from folks that aren't in the bidness. People need to settle into their seats and let the adults talk.

The only opinions that matter (are informed through education and experience) in this are those of educated professionals (lawyers, LEOs, etc.) or someone with the titular 'Justice', as in, 'Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg'.

If you haven't familiarized yourself yet with the actual source documentation for how these situations are taken apart legally, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center has a lovely .pdf that covers the basics. (Big shout out to JPMuscle for the link to such a concise document!) The two key pieces of casework on the subject--both contained within the previously linked .pdf and sub-listed here as separate .pdf's--are Graham V. Connor and Tennessee V. Garner. The former establishes a standard of 'reasonableness' related to a use of force or seizure (which killing a man is a seizure of his life), and the latter applies a 'totality of circumstances' model to any seizure, and particularly to the use of deadly force on a fleeing suspect. Give them a read.

I strap a weapon to my body, throw on a IIIa vest, and sally forth almost every damned day into what is per capita in the top 3 most violent city in the country. Nota bene: opinions are my own, do not represent my agency, or the institution of the The Police.

When I first encountered this incident, my partner was playing the video from the passenger seat while I was finishing a report. At first, I thought that it was cop-on-cop punking; cops making fun of other dumb fudd cops. Then, it kept going, and I thought, 'maybe this is a training video where the instructor is showing everyone how little he knows...', which, if you're in the bidness, is highly plausible. Finally, it struck me. 'Holy shit, this is real.' Then, I watched a compliant, unarmed citizen get burned down in a hotel hallway.

I expect an appeal in this case, and I would not be surprised if this one marches it's way up the ladder to the Supreme Court for that oh so valuable opinion. Or, if you did your homework, you will look at the reasonableness and totality of circumstances and see and that appeal will likely die before it gets to the Supreme Court, which will overturn the holding of the lower court.

First of all, I appreciate your insight and your desire to do the job the right way.

Second, it's people like the rest of us, and the millions of people who have seen the video once it hit social media, that will end up sitting on juries of cases like this, so, yeah, our opinions matter. It's because of this "jib jab" that education occurs that allows for insight, changing of minds, and God forbid, some clarity if we have be in a jury box for a similar case.

[Turnkey11]

This is the first video that I've ever seen this technique used. I've worked for two agencies, learned three different DTAC disciplines, and have never seen anything other than lay on your belly, put your arms out to your sides like you are flying, cross ankles (or spread legs), palms up to the sky, look away from me, do not move. Even in felony stops or an active burg in a dark hallway where I need you to come to me, you will walk backwards with hands in the air until I tell you to stop, then go to your knees while I cuff and search.

To a certain extent I agree with you, if the orders become so FUBAR'd that you cant follow them, just prone with hands deliberately out to your sides and stay put. You may get bean-bagged, but you probably wont get shot.

Thats exactly what I was going to say; if you want him to come to you, walk him backwards towards you to the point that you feel it is safe to go hands on. Then you instruct him to get on his knees, lay down, extend his arms out to his sides, palms up, and cross his feet. His head should be facing away from you, you approach from the feet. If you need to drag him out of the hallway you can do so once hes on the ground, or if you are working with ballistic shields, move then up to pin the arms and provide cover for your hands on guy conducting the search. Id much rather catch a couple boots, knees, or get rough handled a bit for telling the officer to f--k off than get smoked for losing my balance doing a sobriety check on my knees.