Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Use of deadly force police
The police use of deadly force
Tennessee v garner example
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Use of deadly force police
The Tennessee v. Garner case impacted law enforcement agencies today by utilizing the Fourth Amendment right of not using deadly force to prevent a suspect from fleeing unless the officer is in imminent danger of their life. Consequently, before this was set into place, an officer had the right to use deadly force on a fleeing suspect by all means.” The first time the Court dealt with the use of force was in Tennessee v. Garner, in Garner, a police officer used deadly force despite being "reasonably sure" that the suspect was an unarmed teenager "of slight build" who was running away from him” (Gross,2016). Whereas, with Graham v. Conner case was surrounded around excessive force which also has an impact on law enforcement agencies in today’s society as well. “All claims that law enforcement officers have used excessive force deadly or not in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other “seizure” of s free citizen should be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and its “reasonableness” standard” (Doerner,2016). …show more content…
However, if the officer is in immediate threat, he has the right to use deadly force to protect themselves from being the victim. “The Court held that the use of deadly force is subject to the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement, and that the Tennessee statute was unconstitutional in so far as it authorized the use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances” (Gross,2016). Nonetheless, it also depends on the seriousness of the crime as to how excessive the force may be to control the civilian actively resisting apprehension. Conversely, “what Graham did was to set the tone for how officers should be trained to react in a given situation” (Doerner,2016). Therefore, there are variables set in place to control and monitor the law enforcement standards and training aspects
All agencies that equip their officers with Tasers properly train their personnel as well as have it in their use of force continuum. Mr. Bryan was stopped for a seatbelt violation and although he was being vulgar and acting irate, he was not directing it towards Officer McPherson. Even though Bryan exited his vehicle, Officer McPherson could have gave him commands to just stay at the vehicle and do not approach him unless directed to. I have been on traffic stops when the driver abruptly exited the vehicle without being directed to do so. My thought on this is even though they exited their vehicle, I do not want them to get back into their vehicle because they may have a weapon in the vehicle that they cannot now reach or drive off, and I can keep a better eye on their actions out of the vehicle. I believe that Officer McPherson could have handled this situation a lot better with more verbal judo and professionalism. Even though it is taught that a reactionary gap of 21 feet is recommended when dealing with an unknown suspect, Officer McPherson could tell that Bryan had nothing in his hands and did not pose a threat. I am not a fan of Taser guns for the simple fact that there have been too many lawsuits and injuries that stem from the usage of them. My department’s view on them is that they are not necessary and as long as the trooper is properly trained in
The case of Tennessee vs Reeves talks about two youngsters named Tracie Reeves and Molly Coffman who were students at the West Carrol Middle School who were planning to kill their teacher, Janice Geiger (Hall 2014; Schmalleger, 2014). They had planned to poison the teacher with rat poison by putting it in the teacher’s drink (Hall 2014; Schmalleger, 2014). There were other students who had found out, and the plot had been reported to the teacher and principal of the school (Hall 2014; Schmalleger, 2014). The students were convicted of attempt to commit secondary degree murder based on the fact that the poison was brought to the school and if it wasn’t because the plot to killed Miss. Geiger was interrupted the crime would have taken place.
Facts: On October 3, 1974, Memphis Police Officers Hymon and Wright were dispatched to answer a “prowler inside call.” When the police arrived at the scene, a neighbor gestured to the house where she had heard glass breaking and that someone was breaking into the house. While one of the officer radioed that they were on the scene, the other officer went to the rear of the house hearing a door slam and saw someone run across the backyard. The suspect, Edward Garner stopped at a 6-feet-high fence at the edge of the yard and proceeded to climb the fence as the police officer called out “police, halt.” The police officer figured that if Garner made it over the fence he would get away and also “figured” that Garner was unarmed. Officer Hymon then shot him, hitting him in the back of the head. In using deadly force to prevent the escape of Garner, Hymon used the argument that actions were made under the authority of the Tennessee statute and pursuant to Police Department policy. Although the department’s policy was slightly more restrictive than the statute it still allowed the use of deadly force in cases of burglary. Garner’s fathers’ argument was made that his son was shot unconstitutionally because he was captured and shot possessing ten dollars that he had stolen and being unarmed showing no threat of danger to the officer. The incident was then reviewed by the Memphis Police Firearm’s Revie...
.... Madison was applied to this decision because the actions committed were unconstitutional. According to the Supreme Court the 8th Amendment was broken because the District Court of Appeal was giving a cruel and unusual punishment to Graham. The 8th amendment claus does not allow a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in jail without a parole for a non-homicidal crime. Therefore Terrance could not fall through with this punishment.
The case was Texas v. White. The state of Texas brought suit in the United States Supreme Court to have certain United States government bonds declared the property of the state, and to prevent the present holders of the bonds from collecting upon them. Texas had owned the bonds before the Civil War. As a means of financing during the war, while Texas was a member of the Confederacy, the bonds were sold. Texas now claimed that the sale was void and the bonds still belonged to the state.
Over the years, our nation has witnessed countless cases of police brutality. It has developed into a controversial topic between communities. For instance, deindustrialization is the removal or reduction of manufacturing capability or activity can lead to more crimes when people are laid off. Police officers are faced with many threatening situations day-to-day gripping them to make split second decisions; either to expect the worst or hope for the best. The police are given the authority to take any citizen away for their action that can ruin their lives. With that kind of power comes great responsibility, which is one main concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force might or
Here is the history behind the Texas vs. Johnson case. A man by the name of Gregory Lee Johnson was condemned by Texas for breaking a law (which was the desecration of the flag.) Johnson damaged an American flag, in 1984, by burning it. He did so in front of Dallas City Hall, because he disapproved of the policies of Reagan administration. He was fined 2,000 dollars and condemned to jail for a year (Texas v. Johnson, Oyez).
Connor, the Supreme Court held that the test used for whether force was excessive should be “objective reasonableness” and not based on how much pain an officer inflicted upon a suspect. They remanded the case to a lower court based on their described standard. Under this standard (or test), officers have the right to use “reasonable” force in any interaction with the public. They are not obligated to use the least possible force as long as the force is objectively reasonable. The test indicates that the use of force should be from the perspective of the officer on the scene at the time and not in
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use force or when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force may or not be a large predicament but should be viewed by both the police and the community.
Furthermore, many individuals believe that the police officers are misusing their power by taking extreme measures when situations arise. In shootings for example, we see that many police officers claim that their lives were in danger and the individual displayed threatening behavior that required them to fire. Many people contend this as they think that the police officers did not have sufficient discretion in firing their weapon and used their deep rooted, or even subtle, racism in handling the situation. In other words, had the individual been White the situation would have ended differently, and not with a dead African American person. The fact that in each of these cases of police brutality the individual ends up dead and unable to tell their side of the story is extremely alarming to
On the 11th of June, 1982 following the conviction of a criminal offense, Robert Johnson was sentenced to two years probation. The terms of his probation included his person, posessions, and residence being searched upon reasonable request. When a search warrant was executed for Johnson’s roommate, officers testified that with enough reasonable suspicion, they were able to search Johnson’s living area as well.
Was the intrusion based on a lawful objective, such as a valid arrest, detention, search, frisk, community warden guardian of mentally ill, defense of an officer or a citizen, or to prevent escape? If these answer yes then an officer may have legal ability to use the levels of force listed below to apprehend the suspect. Another list of things to consider when determining if it was a lawful use of force is; was the use of force relative to the person’s confrontation? Was there a crucial need to terminate the condition? Even though there is no duty to retreat, could the officer have used lesser force and still safely accomplish the lawful objective? These are the questions that the jury need to answer to determine if they should side with or against the officer in any court case brought to them that deals with such a controversial topic as this.
This essay will bring to light the problem of racial profiling in the police force and propose the eradication of any discrimination. The Fourth Amendment states “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Despite this right, multiple minorities across the country suffer at the hands of police officers through racial profiling; the singling out of a person or persons as the main suspect of a crime based on their race. Many people have also suffered the loss of a loved one because police believed the suspect to be a threat based on their races therefore the officers use their authority to take out the “threat”. Although racial profiling may make sense to police officers in the line of duty, through the eyes of the public and those affected by police actions, it is a form a racism that is not being confronted and is allowing unjust convictions and deaths.
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use force or when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force may or not be a large predicament but should be viewed by both the police and the community.
Many do not know what Deadly Force is and when is the appropriate time for the Police Officer to use it. According to CFR 1047.7 “Deadly Force means that force which is reasonable person would consider likely to cause death or serious body harm”. This means that deadly force is supposed to be used as a last resort when Police Officer cannot get the situation under. To be able to use Deadly Force it has to be justified only if when all of the lesser means have failed to work or they cannot be employed reasonably. A Police Officer that is protective is authorized to use deadly force only when one of the five circumstances exist. The first circumstance is “Self-Defense, Serious Offenses against persons, Nuclear Weapon...