Dallas Swat kills suspect carrying “assault rifle”

[gtolbert09]

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Polic ... 10041.html

One man among the group of suspects running away from the vehicle was shot by a SWAT officer, police said. The man had been armed with an assault rifle when he was shot.

[Soccerdad1995]

This definitely does not look good. Hopefully he wasn't actually shot while running away.

[C-dub]

This is going to be a rough one. There might be some interesting rulings that come from this. For instance, if the suspect had not just committed or was involved in the deadly robbery and attempting to flee that scene, will deadly force in this instance be justified by the officer? I'm wondering if he was only a suspect and they were attempting to obtain a warrant if there was any way for the officer to know or presume this guy was the shooter.

Of course, my other question is does running from the police with a weapon justify the use of deadly force by the police absent any other known facts?

[narcissist]

This definitely does not look good. Hopefully he wasn't actually shot while running away.

a bullet to the back is never a good idea for Anyone!

[03Lightningrocks]

I think having a weapon in hand while trying to escape is going to qualify the dead guy as a legitimate target. I suppose we shall see.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

Plus, if the forensic examination of his long gun proves it was used to kill someone previously, that would tend to strengthen the DPD's justification.

SIA

[C-dub]

Plus, if the forensic examination of his long gun proves it was used to kill someone previously, that would tend to strengthen the DPD's justification.

SIA

Maybe, but the officer wouldn’t have known that at the time.

[rotor]

Cops have been shot by BG running away, without turning their body away but shooting backwards. This was an armed robbery case with a dead store employee. I may be way off base but "shot in the back" is not the deciding case to me, especially when the car he was in was under surveillance, a warrant was being obtained and the guy runs. I may be way off but I bet he has a long rap sheet and couldn't legally own the "assault rifle". Of course, we need some more info...

[OneGun]

What is the policy on shooting fleeing felons??

[Soccerdad1995]

What is the policy on shooting fleeing felons??

Not just a fleeing felon, but one who poses a clear and imminent threat to the community at large. Dunno about Dallas, but many jurisdictions have the, "imminent threat," statement, whereby stopping a deadly threat is justified.

That's good to know.

Are you saying that its justified in some jurisdictions to shoot a fleeing suspect that you reasonably believe poses a clear and imminent threat to the community at large? I'm thinking about someone who tries to car jack you (with a weapon) and then flees when you present your own weapon. I was always under the impression that shooting them while they are fleeing would likely end badly for the shooter from a legal standpoint.

I guess it might come down to the definition of "imminent" threat to the community.

[Mike S]

What is the policy on shooting fleeing felons??

Not just a fleeing felon, but one who poses a clear and imminent threat to the community at large. Dunno about Dallas, but many jurisdictions have the, "imminent threat," statement, whereby stopping a deadly threat is justified.

That's good to know.

Are you saying that its justified in some jurisdictions to shoot a fleeing suspect that you reasonably believe poses a clear and imminent threat to the community at large? I'm thinking about someone who tries to car jack you (with a weapon) and then flees when you present your own weapon. I was always under the impression that shooting them while they are fleeing would likely end badly for the shooter from a legal standpoint.

I guess it might come down to the definition of "imminent" threat to the community.

It's different for LE, generally. If a carjacker saw a PD unit turning the corner, and ran for your front door (which we'll say is unsecured for some reason) it would not be unreasonable for you to, "stop the threat," based on your knowledge of the threat of violence, vulnerability of family members, etc.. I would not recommend testing this one out, but it could be argued.

LE has responsibility to the community (e.g., Kitty Genovese), and so if a violent armed felon is escaping, dependent on Departmental ROE, they may be, "stopped with all necessary force." This is standard for Corrections, with a max security inmate bracing the fence. The CO will issue a verbal command and may or may not fire a warning shot, but once the inmate hits the wire, it's shoot to put down("COM until activity of escape ceases", specifically).

TPC 9.51 covers when a LEO, or someone assisting a LEO, may be justified in using deadly force. Note this is State law; each department may have their own policy that adds on more requirements, escalation of force options, etc.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code ... -9-51.html

It appears to be limited in scope, & certain elements must be met (or, not feasible to meet under the circumstances). Just having a subject flee a felony isn't justification, but fleeing a felony or attempting to effect an arrest for a felony where the subject had used / attempted to use deadly force (as in the topic of this post), may be justified.

The relevant parts are:

(c) A peace officer is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree the peace officer reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary to make an arrest, or to prevent escape after arrest, if the use of force would have been justified under Subsection (a) and:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct for which arrest is authorized included the use or attempted use of deadly force;  or

(2) the actor reasonably believes there is a substantial risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious bodily injury to the actor or another if the arrest is delayed.

The reference to 'must be justified under subsection (a)' refers to the officers justification for using force to effect an arrest in the first place. The two requirements for using force to either arrest, or prevent escape following arrest, are:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the arrest or search is lawful or, if the arrest or search is made under a warrant, he reasonably believes the warrant is valid;  and

(2) before using force, the actor manifests his purpose to arrest or search and identifies himself as a peace officer or as one acting at a peace officer's direction, unless he reasonably believes his purpose and identity are already known by or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested.

...and, there must be a reasonable belief that the level of force used is necessary. Very similar to the standards we're held to under TPC 9.31 & 9.32, minus the authority to arrest, or use deadly force to prevent someone from fleeing after the threat of deadly force is over.

[montgomery]

I think having a weapon in hand while trying to escape is going to qualify the dead guy as a legitimate target. I suppose we shall see.

What was the crime or probable cause? Running while legally possessing a long gun?

[Charles L. Cotton]

I think having a weapon in hand while trying to escape is going to qualify the dead guy as a legitimate target. I suppose we shall see.

What was the crime or probable cause? Running while legally possessing a long gun?

Evading a legal temporary detention by law enforcement, just to start.

Chas.