The main mandate that police officers are charged with is guaranteeing public safety. As they perform this duty, officer often encounter challenges. Threats to their own safety and lives are among these challenges. In the United States, police officers have been forced to use lethal force in response to threats that they faced (Kindy et al., 2015). In some of these cases, it was settled that the officer faced a real threat and their action was justified. However, some other cases have elicited strong reactions and have seen officers made to justify their actions. These cases particularly involve the shooting of unarmed black men. While officers have shot dozens of black men who posed no threat, not a single officer has been convicted. This indicates that the US legal system places the safety and wellbeing of officers above the welfare of the public.
Facts of the case
The individual who was shot may choose to sue Officer Jones, the concerned police department and the city. If he does this, this individual will need to develop a case that is grounded on facts. In this case, Officer Jones shot the individual whom he thought had robbed a woman who had approached him earlier. The shooting occurred because Officer Jones mistakenly believed that the individual possessed a weapon and therefore, posed a threat to his life. It was later determined that the individual that what the individual had was cocaine and a cellphone. The individual should appeal to the court to take action against the officer and to demand compensation from the police department and the city.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Crimes and civil action
An examination of the facts of this case reveals that a number of crimes were committed. Providing misleading information to a police officer is among these crimes. Section 4906 (a) of the US criminal code prohibits making false reports that incriminate another person (Pennsylvania General Assembly, n.d). The woman violated this provision as she lied to Officer Jones. She lied that she had been robbed when the truth was that she had suffered domestic abuse and did not wish to see her husband arrested. The second crime is the possession of drugs. In the case, it is revealed that cocaine was found in the possession of the man who was shot. As per US law, “it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to possess a controlled substance…” (DOJ, n.d). The man who was shot has clearly violated this law.
Police officers have an obligation to safeguard the wellbeing of the members of the public. These include victims of crime (“Public Protection”, 2009). Providing medical assistance and remaining present are just some of the roles that the officers are required to perform. In the case, Officer Jones abandoned the woman as he pursued the suspect. This can be considered criminal. In the past, there have been numerous cases where officers have been charged with abandoning victims or engaging in actions that cause victims to suffer further harm. Sanders v. City of Philadelphia is an example of such cases (“Public Protection”, 2009). The fourth crime that has been committed is the shooting of the man. While US law permits law enforcement agents to use lethal force, it limits this to situations where such force is called for. Scenarios where the life of an officer is at risk are among these situations. It is difficult to determine if the life of Officer Jones was in any real danger. Therefore, a long and intriguing court battle should be expected as Officer Jones defends his actions. A civil action may result from the crimes discussed above. Essentially a civil action is a lawsuit that is filed to safeguard the rights of private citizens. Civil actions are not criminal proceedings. From the case above, a civil action may involve the woman complaining that Officer Jones abandoned her at a time when she desperately needed emotional support and medical assistance. The court will undoubtedly dismiss this complaint since the woman set in motion a chain of events that led to the shooting of a man.
Analysis of fact pattern
The events in the case are closely linked with one setting the stage for another. The woman’s allegations that she had been robbed are the antecedent. It is because Officer Jones responded to these allegations that he shot the man. The man is also to blame for the escalation of the situation. He only stopped after being asked a second time. In the US, civilians are required to comply with the instructions of police officers. The man should also shoulder some blame for refusing to expose his hands and reaching into his pocket. His actions must have frightened Officer Jones, causing him to fire. It is clear that Officer Jones is simply a responsible police officer who acted with wisdom and caution. He should not be faulted for the situation.
Applicable principles of criminal law
In an earlier discussion, it was stated that the man who was shot may sue Officer Jones, the police department and the city. His suit against Officer Jones will be because this officer shot him despite posing no threat. This lawsuit has some basis in criminal law. The law stipulates that the use of lethal force is only lawful when it is applied “to prevent grave and imminent harm from the perspective of a ‘reasonable officer on the scene” (“U.S. Laws Protect”, 2016). The question here is whether Officer Jones was reasonable in his actions. This is the central issue that the course will deliberate on as it hears the case. Another issue of criminal law concerns filing a lawsuit against the police department and the city. Section 1983 of US Code reads
Any person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities security by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress (“Civil Remedies”, n.d).
Essentially, this means that police departments and cities bear responsibility for the actions of individual officers. The man who was shot should use this legal provision as the basis for his lawsuit against the police department and the city.
Another law that applies to the case concerns providing misleading and false information to the police. As already stated, section 4906(a) of the criminal code spells out that any individual who provides misleading or false information may face charges. As part of his defense, Officer Jones may cite this law to argue that his actions were the direct result of the false allegations that the woman made. In a previous section, it was noted that Officer Jones abandoned the woman. This could be the basis of a criminal lawsuit against him. A criminal law principle that applies to this situation is the provision that police officers must provide protection to victims of crime. This same principle applies to the civil action that the woman may take. The woman may argue that Officer Jones neglected his responsibility when he abandoned her. While all these laws and principles will play some role in determining how the case unfolds, the law regarding the use of lethal force will have the most profound impact. This is because the use of lethal force is clearly the major issue in the case.
In conclusion, police officers face daunting challenges as they strive to protect the public. They are confronted with situations that force them to place their own lives at risk. Since they are human, these officers can be expected to respond in an effort to protect themselves. Using lethal force is among the measures that they make take. However, even as they use this force, the officers should exercise restraint, objectivity and wisdom. This will go a long way in preventing the hundreds of deaths resulting from the use of lethal force that are reported every year in the United States.
References
Civil Remedies. (n.d). Retrieved 26 th July 2017 from https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports98/police/uspo40.htm
US Department of Justice (DOJ). (n.d). Title 21 United States (USC) Controlled Substances Act. Retrieved 25 th July 2017 from https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/844.htm
Kindy, K., Fisher, M., Tate, J. & Jenkins, J. (2015). A Year of Reckoning: Police Fatality Shoot Nearly 1,000.
Pennsylvania General Assembly. (n.d). Title 18. Retrieved 25 th July 2017 from http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=18&div=0&chpt=49
Public Protection: Injured Crime and Accident Victims. (2009). Retrieved 25 th July 2017 from http://www.aele.org/law/2009all08/2009-08MLJ101.pdf
US Laws Protect Police, while Endangering Civilians. (2016). Retrieved 25 th July 2017 from http://theconversation.com/u-s-laws-protect-police-while-endangering-civilians-52737
