0:02

how do grog am it's yeardley and

0:05

dipper

0:09

and dan and dave

0:11

yeah chm listen

0:13

have you ever wanted to wake up to a of

0:16

hot it a is snazzy town,

0:18

dick well then walk,

0:20

your fingers are crossed that keyboard too so

0:26

out our small town merch

0:29

store

0:29

like coffee

0:32

mugs enamel pins pint

0:34

and shot glasses we've also

0:36

got some true crime same to merge like a

0:38

key chain pepper spray a

0:40

small pepper spray that sits on your t change

0:42

in change leather small town decks case we

0:45

also have an auto safety tool used

0:47

a recommended by many first responders

0:49

it's the same time that time used to carry on my key chain

0:52

it has it has blade slice through your seatbelt

0:54

if you're trapped in your car after an accident as

0:57

well as a spring loaded spite had to shattered

0:59

glass in emergencies of course

1:01

we hope you never have to use it but you'll be

1:04

glad you have it if he ever do comfy

1:06

fuzzy socks with the small town decks

1:08

logo come on buddhism once

1:10

and cozy sox from their favorite podcast

1:13

i do i do so check out these

1:15

items add more in our merch store

1:17

at one

1:38

everyday employees stations

1:40

across the world law enforcement officers

1:42

begin their ship with briefing briefings

1:45

or essential to communication and allow

1:47

officers and command staff to discuss

1:49

calls for service crime trends

1:51

case law wanted subjects

1:54

training opportunities and policy

1:56

changes leasing rooms provide

1:58

a setting where the to speak decision the

2:00

handedly can openly we

2:02

, to create a similar setting for our listeners

2:05

the briefing room series will include intimate

2:07

informal conversations about training

2:09

issues viral videos guidance

2:12

and training from the texas as well as

2:14

commentary on the other topics impacting

2:16

law enforcement and the true friend community

2:19

so welcome to the prefer

2:28

they are in a briefing room lisa

2:30

it would be really informative to talk about

2:32

some law ,

2:34

greatly informs how police officers

2:37

are expected to do their jobs out

2:39

in the field so

2:41

have with me

2:43

active com

2:44

hello team

2:46

how are you at as detect game

2:49

hello small town fan

2:51

or a than classes

2:53

in session started some

2:56

so basically when

2:58

we talk about case law it's it's

3:01

an ongoing curriculum for

3:03

police officers it's a constant

3:06

update for us every

3:08

year we have training on new case

3:10

law and on case was

3:13

it's maybe been affected by other decisions

3:16

so for this episode

3:18

the two cases were talking about here are

3:20

tennessee versus garner and

3:23

graham first connor now tennessee

3:25

verse garnered this case happen and seventy

3:27

four it was ruled on until nineteen eighty

3:29

five by the supreme court

3:32

but this case has to do with the

3:34

right of the police to shoot

3:36

a fleeing felon the will talk

3:38

about that one and the other cases

3:41

graham v connor this

3:43

case was ruled on by the

3:45

supreme court and nineteen eighty nine

3:47

and what this case did was

3:50

it created a three pronged test

3:53

for , use of force

3:55

decisions and

3:57

it's the basis the

3:59

officers are judged in use

4:02

of force situations today and

4:04

twenty twenty two

4:05

these two cases aren't landmark decisions

4:08

that have survived all kinds of challenges

4:10

over the years going through being

4:12

reevaluated by the courts

4:15

they've all been affirmed these are solid

4:17

decisions and

4:19

you're not going anywhere this is how

4:21

cases are evaluated by

4:23

district attorneys

4:25

though

4:26

are examining whether or not the police used

4:28

a reasonable amount of force what

4:30

these two cases

4:32

basically revolve

4:35

around his reasonableness

4:38

and that's and word that we use and law enforcement

4:40

quite frequently every use

4:42

of force has to be reasonable ah

4:45

when we talk about how

4:47

officers react in the decisions they make

4:49

we use the reasonable

4:52

ness test to gauge

4:54

whether or not a similarly

4:57

trained officer with similar

4:59

experience would make decisions

5:01

similar to the officer

5:04

in question

5:05

though these cases and and other

5:08

cases provide a framework for

5:10

how police officers do what they do out

5:12

on the streets ah everyday

5:15

the first one i want to talk about his tennessee verse

5:17

garner will hear arguments first this

5:19

morning in tennessee against garners

5:22

this happened in tennessee back

5:24

in nineteen seventy four leaving

5:26

of october third i think family

5:29

for the police received the call

5:31

to come to the scene of what was

5:33

an apparent breaking and entering these

5:35

officers arrive at the house

5:38

one of them goes behind the house and

5:40

ccs and suspect running

5:42

across

5:43

the yard

5:44

he gets chase the

5:46

suspect encounters a six foot

5:48

high chain link fence the

5:50

officer afterwards says

5:54

i didn't believe he was armed

5:56

that's important he

5:58

confronts the suspect

5:59

his name is garner his

6:02

last name is garner garner

6:05

disregards the officers commands

6:07

to stop and

6:09

comply garnered does

6:11

not comply garner begins going

6:14

over the sense the

6:16

officer pulls out his weapon

6:18

and shoots garner in the back of the head nichols

6:21

there are two issues in this

6:23

case the ,

6:26

deals with the constitutionality of

6:28

state statute statute regard

6:31

to the used by police officer of all

6:33

necessary means to affect an affect

6:36

the second is one of the municipalities

6:39

use of deadly force to

6:41

apprehend they fleeing burglary

6:44

suspect after exhausting

6:46

all of all reasonable means is constitutionally

6:48

permissible

6:50

back then and tennessee they had a state statute

6:53

that you could shoot fleeing salads even

6:56

in the state the dave and i worked in there

6:58

was a fleeing felon statute the you could use

7:00

deadly force that

7:03

statute is trumped by this case

7:05

law tennessee verse garner this

7:08

is supreme court case well yeah

7:10

this is supreme court case law it

7:13

actually went through a few

7:15

lower courts

7:16

it basically

7:18

the suspect in this case

7:21

he was fifteen years old the

7:23

gets shot in the back of the head and he dies

7:25

on the way to the hospital they

7:27

find ten dollars and dollars purse

7:30

in his possession that were taken

7:32

from the house during the burglary

7:34

and

7:35

police officers now we recognize this

7:38

used forces being completely

7:40

unreasonable that you can't

7:43

just shoot somebody cause they're running from you

7:45

but this this case law that really sucked

7:48

to be clear

7:50

heard of guess

7:52

hey fantasy versus garner

7:55

you are now no longer allowed

7:57

to just shoes

7:58

fleeing felon

7:59

shell correct okay

8:02

the tennessee statute back in nineteen

8:04

seventy four stated if

8:06

after notice of the intention to arrest

8:08

the defendant

8:11

the defendant either fleece or forcibly

8:13

resists

8:14

the answer may use all the necessary means

8:17

the fact the arrest

8:19

now include everything

8:21

that's pretty all encompassing right there

8:24

yeah by one would assume that

8:26

you try several other

8:28

tactics all the other texas to

8:30

start the fleeing felon before

8:33

he resorted to deadly force

8:36

the suspects father

8:38

ring suit and says that this

8:40

was excessive force

8:42

and i agree and

8:46

at first the courts side

8:48

with the police and the prosecution

8:50

and state on this say

8:53

note we have a statute the says he

8:55

can use any means to

8:57

affect the arrest then

8:59

goes to the court of appeals and

9:01

a court of appeal says the

9:03

killing of a fleeing suspect is a seizure

9:07

for the purposes of the fourth amendment

9:10

that means

9:12

the fourth amendment has do with search and seizure

9:15

the fourth amendment is why we have to write search

9:17

warrants for properties are when someone

9:19

has a right to privacy and that dwelling

9:21

the now question presented as well

9:24

as they lost realizing the killing of an unarmed

9:26

nonviolent swing cell and by police

9:29

in order to prevent escape cost is unreasonable

9:31

searches and seizures the first

9:34

the broader definition of seizure is basically

9:36

a fire rescue that's a seizure if i

9:38

put my hands on you that's a seizure

9:41

even if i limit your movement without putting

9:44

my hands on you like it detain you

9:46

by giving you of herbal command stop

9:48

right there sit down i am

9:50

seeing you at that moment

9:53

so when you shoot somebody

9:56

you have now disable

9:58

their ability to get away and you

10:00

as effectively sees them for

10:02

all intents and purposes so

10:05

that's what we mean by seizure

10:10

the the court of appeals ruled in this case

10:12

that

10:13

the killing of a fleeing suspect is

10:16

in fact a seizure

10:17

it's only law for when it's reasonable okay

10:22

it's only constitutional when it's reasonable

10:25

you can this case the officer admitting

10:28

that he recognized the suspect

10:30

is not armed and didn't believe him to be

10:33

harmed so this officer knows

10:36

that this person

10:38

there's not

10:39

armed with a weapon that

10:43

that officers also covered by this than

10:45

existing statute in tennessee which

10:47

says you can chew

10:49

fleeing someone

10:51

this case eventually goes to the supreme court

10:53

in the supreme court basically says the use

10:55

of deadly force against the subject is the most

10:57

intrusive type of seizure possible

11:00

because it deprives the suspect of his life

11:02

and i think we'd all agree on that

11:04

yeah

11:05

the majority opinion of the court

11:07

held that the state failed to present

11:10

evidence that it's interest in shooting unarmed

11:12

fleeing suspect

11:14

outweighs the suspects interest

11:16

in his own survival

11:18

he can you say again please

11:20

the majority of the court held

11:22

that the state failed to present evidence

11:25

that it's interesting shooting unarmed fleeing

11:27

suspects outweighs the suspects

11:29

interest in his own survival

11:31

right sell it goes back

11:33

to that word reasonableness

11:36

yeah i

11:37

the me is pretty obvious that in this situation

11:40

that's an equitable

11:42

right

11:44

that you can shoot somebody just because they're running

11:46

from you

11:47

yeah

11:48

yeah anytime we talk about use force for

11:50

going to talk about reasonableness i mean

11:52

we could talk about this case for a long time and a lot

11:55

of it had to do as common law which common

11:57

law goes way way way way back

11:59

i mean we're talking about like english com

12:03

and law

12:04

right so it's

12:06

antique law

12:07

this really what it is i think

12:09

we've evolved

12:11

the really want to have evolved

12:14

the law house

12:15

the mammals the

12:18

dissenting opinion in this case was actually

12:20

from justice o'connor

12:22

the type find a little surprising

12:24

sandra day o'connor yeah

12:27

the you think that it

12:28

really years unreasonable

12:30

under the fourth amendment for

12:33

an officer

12:36

who would kill age

12:38

and experience i don't

12:40

burglars stop or i'll shoot

12:44

you think before

12:45

the amendment prohibits thing

12:47

you think that there's there's no

12:50

, for saying that the person

12:53

who refuses to he that morning

12:55

is knowingly giving up to any right

12:58

to have alternative action taken

13:01

i i ok to thirty fourth marriage should

13:03

allow such a shooting i think that unless

13:05

the state interests that require it because

13:07

of the interest of protecting the public or

13:09

the fourth amendment was his would

13:12

buy that susan the author of

13:14

may have other alternatives he should run after him

13:18

is he calling assistance or investigate

13:20

the scenes it does not invariably follow

13:22

the person gets away will never be caught oh

13:25

that may offer me the consequences are over

13:27

the past

13:28

though and her opinion she highlights

13:31

the fact the police officers must have often

13:33

make swift spread the moment decisions

13:35

while on patrol and argued that the robbery

13:38

and assault that happen in the home or related

13:40

to the already serious crime

13:42

a burglary which

13:44

we can agree

13:46

i think burglary is a serious crime

13:48

specially to residents was this an occupied

13:50

dwelling it doesn't say anything and

13:52

here i don't believe it was occupied at the time justice

13:55

o'connor mentions the robbery

13:58

inside the house and i'm thinking was some

14:00

sort of confrontation inside the house

14:03

it , change what happens if sense

14:06

especially when the officer says i

14:08

didn't believe the suspect to be

14:10

armed right there is

14:12

a huge turnoff moment

14:14

this case

14:15

right your allies as

14:17

an officer is not endanger did

14:20

kid is just try to get away from the

14:22

is so that seems massively

14:25

excessive can you just i

14:27

know he said it many times on his part

14:29

yes but iraqi can't remember the difference

14:32

between robbery burglary one has

14:34

to do with people involved people involved does

14:36

correct yeah so robbery

14:38

his i forcibly

14:40

or by threat of force or intimidation

14:43

take something from

14:45

you the you encounter

14:47

me write a burglary is

14:50

i break into a house there's nobody around

14:53

even if there is somebody around is sleeping

14:55

on the couch there's

14:57

no interaction between me and the other

14:59

person so burglary is considered a

15:01

property crime because you've just broken

15:03

into a place like

15:06

, building or house a robbery

15:08

as a person crime because you are physically

15:11

either intimidating threatening with

15:13

and with and weapon or you fighting

15:15

with a

15:18

person so robbery his

15:20

people on people burglary is

15:23

a property crime

15:25

so when you get down to brass tacks

15:28

about what this decision did for

15:30

police officers is it

15:33

established that the reasonableness

15:36

of an officer use officer force whether

15:38

against whether against suspect or otherwise

15:41

this to be determined from the perspective of the officer

15:43

under the circumstances that were apparent to

15:45

him or her at the time so

15:48

like we we touched on earlier did

15:50

not observe a weapon had

15:53

clear view the officer had a flashlight

15:55

and was face to face with the suspect

15:58

before the suspect turn to flee and

16:00

he officer said night and believe he was armed

16:04

see team

16:06

well the officer actually estimated

16:08

this kids age to be seventeen or

16:10

eighteen nope i've seen kids

16:13

that i swear to god were twenty years old

16:15

that were only

16:16

fourteen or fifteen years old is or six foot

16:19

two and unless

16:21

you're talking about there's just an obvious

16:24

discrepancy of what you're looking

16:26

at i mean an eight year old kid i don't think anybody's

16:29

gonna a mistake and eight year old for an eighteen year old

16:31

but a fifteen year old

16:32

i consider especially one

16:35

bold enough to go commit a burglary

16:37

if you want to play adult games you're

16:40

in the adult arena now and

16:42

there are consequences not say that

16:44

mr garner deserved what he got that

16:48

you open yourself up to a series

16:50

of circumstances that are now our

16:52

your hands

16:53

if you're going to break into somebody's

16:55

house there is a chance

16:57

that

16:58

the harsh consequences

17:01

will have will have i'm thera

17:03

bad things that can happen when you

17:05

put yourself under that circumstance

17:07

though there's another one here and it's

17:10

graham verse connor guide

17:12

to thorn graham goes to a convenience

17:15

store with a buddy he is

17:17

feeling a little off because he's diabetic

17:20

and he feels like he's haven't

17:22

insulin reaction so he's gonna go get

17:24

some sugar

17:25

they're like even amount and

17:29

he goes into inside the store the looks

17:31

and goes the lines too long and leave

17:34

and he returns

17:36

to his friends vehicle they drive

17:38

away from the store and officer

17:40

connor a police officer saar

17:44

grams behavior and became suspicious

17:48

though officer connor polls

17:50

graham and his friend over and

17:52

during the encounter the officer

17:55

tries to detain graham and

17:57

graham resist arrest and his

17:59

injury breaks

17:59

for

18:00

the and it's got some cuts on

18:03

his wrist he's got a bruise forehead

18:05

and he injured his shoulder during the scuffle

18:09

so he filed a federal lawsuit against the officer

18:12

basically alleging that the use of force during

18:14

the stop was excessive and

18:17

violated his civil rights

18:19

though

18:20

eventually went to the spring course will

18:23

hear argument next number eighty seven sixty

18:25

five seventy one c sar

18:27

and graham versus m s honor

18:30

and again we're

18:32

talking about reasonableness the

18:34

word that is a character

18:36

in our lives as police officers reasonableness

18:40

and the supreme court held the determining

18:42

the reasonableness have reasonableness seizure requires a

18:44

careful balancing of the nature and quality

18:47

of the intrusion on the and individuals

18:49

fourth amendment interests against amendment countervailing

18:52

governmental interests at stake

18:54

so

18:56

whitney grabbers on someone's as

18:58

a police officer there's a reasonableness

19:00

test that you must put is it reasonable

19:02

that i use all means of

19:05

force necessary to affect

19:07

an arrest and it's similar to

19:09

tennessee verse garner support this

19:11

court in tennessee versus gorda reasonableness

19:14

depends not only when a seizure is

19:16

made that also how it it's

19:18

is carried out

19:20

the court basically said given the fact

19:22

known at the time what a similarly

19:24

trained and experienced officer

19:27

respond in a similar fashion as

19:29

cornered

19:30

that's the question they're asking

19:32

yes

19:33

both courts how respondents conduct

19:35

was objectively reasonable considering

19:37

the need for force the amount of force used

19:40

in the extent of the injuries that a petitioner

19:42

has alleged oh what

19:45

, was live for him come from

19:47

the diabetic coma at

19:50

the time the officers didn't know that he was

19:53

idea diabetic coma did

19:55

he ever weapon of any kind

19:57

of the record doesn't indicate police

19:59

the really didn't show elements in the movie that's

20:02

correct a direct line was yeah just

20:04

record shows that he was properly spot

20:08

as a suspect for a criminal investigation

20:10

that he was acting suspiciously that he was acting

20:12

in a bizarre manner said

20:15

mr barrie ask for office is hop officer

20:17

connors health mr barrie so said

20:19

he said he didn't know what was wrong with petitioner

20:22

might be his insulin reaction of the sugar

20:24

reaction he never seen one he was scared

20:26

he didn't know what to do he ask for officer connors

20:29

house he testified that citizens

20:31

throwing his hands around this report

20:33

stated without some predictions that it when

20:35

the backup officers were arriving a scuffle started

20:38

at that point the officer saw to work

20:40

with the handcuffs petitioners

20:43

, resisted the hands as he threw his hands around

20:45

more did even as he was himself

20:47

in the officers went to put him in the car the undisputed

20:49

record shows that he was vigorously citing and city

20:52

resisted getting into the accent the

20:54

district court in a court of appeals court time

20:56

is it resistance

20:58

even as he was he's given

21:01

a crowd the was gathers getting out of hand the police

21:03

were more reasonable in deciding

21:05

that they needed forced to overcome his resistance

21:08

and other needed to get him into the car quickly and

21:10

out of a hostile environment so

21:13

what does supreme court did as they came up with

21:15

their three questions

21:17

the you answer as an officer

21:19

when using force that's

21:22

called a three pronged graham test

21:25

okay what are the three questions

21:28

the severity of the crime it issue

21:31

whether the suspect poses an

21:33

immediate threat to the safety of the officer

21:35

or other and

21:38

whether the suspect is actively resisting

21:40

arrest or attempting to evade arrest

21:42

by fleeing the have to take

21:44

those things into account and

21:47

again

21:48

this all comes down to reasonableness and

21:51

why the courts

21:53

the district attorney's offices are

21:55

unable to monday morning quarterback

21:59

the dawn case law like

22:01

graham vs corner in tennessee

22:03

vs garner is that

22:06

police officers are judged in

22:09

the moment

22:10

not with the benefit of hindsight we

22:14

have other officers as a

22:16

kind of

22:17

the reasonableness standard is

22:20

what another officer with same amount

22:22

or similar training with

22:24

similar experiences in

22:27

that situation where they have acted

22:29

similarly to way this officer acted

22:31

and is that reasonable

22:34

police officers in the heat of the moment making

22:36

split second decisions when is a

22:38

split second

22:41

we're talking like

22:43

could be gone in one second

22:45

if i don't do this or if i do this

22:49

that's not fair to judge people

22:52

if you aren't there

22:54

that

22:56

can't stress that enough it's what

22:58

the officers experiencing at the time

23:00

not what

23:01

me on my

23:03

couch watching the news

23:06

later that night or a day later

23:09

i'm not qualified to judge that me i

23:11

can make a judgment on the reasonableness

23:14

of the use of force based on do

23:16

i have similar training do i understand

23:19

that moment to i understand

23:22

the all the

23:23

outside factors that go

23:25

into the totality of the circumstances

23:28

right in front of this officer which is

23:30

the importance of the three protest so

23:33

the severity of the crime it issue did

23:35

escape steal a pack of skittles not

23:38

quite different if this person is

23:40

a kidnapper

23:42

right

23:43

he also whether

23:45

the suspects poses of immediate

23:47

threat to the safety of the officers

23:49

or others now another way to look at

23:51

that is what is this person

23:54

gets away that's also that's threat

23:56

to others correct so i would go back

23:58

to in season

23:59

you monster monster

24:03

now it's that

24:04

the kidnapper would have gotten away

24:07

to see pose a threat to the public

24:09

hell yes he does and to

24:11

that little girl and to that little girl we

24:14

cannot let him get away so where

24:16

they justified in using deadly

24:19

force against him they didn't that

24:22

i think they were just fine they

24:24

would have if there was only one

24:26

police officer in this guy is

24:28

running through the forest with this girl trying

24:31

to get away or the girl the

24:33

safe now in the guys still trying to get

24:35

away but he's running toward a neighborhood

24:38

i would say that that guy poses

24:40

an immediate threat to the public

24:42

eric

24:44

anna a

24:45

whether he's actively resisting arrest

24:48

or attempting to evade arrest by fly

24:51

the that sort of combined with number two in

24:53

this particular case is he's trying to get

24:55

away

24:56

yes and particularly when

24:58

i was a canine officer these factors

25:01

would go into decisions i made on

25:03

whether or not i was going to deploy my dog

25:05

or however gonna deploy my dog off

25:08

leash on , long line

25:10

on a six foot lease on a twelve foot

25:13

lead my long line was twenty five

25:15

feet all of these factors

25:17

whether factors not i was gonna muslim my dog

25:20

literally am

25:22

from biting assessment

25:24

yeah

25:25

one of the questions i would ask officers

25:27

when i went to assist them if i was

25:30

going deploy canine was

25:32

pc for crime right now what

25:35

is that crime? like i've got

25:37

theft, three is a a shoplifter

25:39

who ran from walmart and

25:41

he ran northbound, go find him i'm

25:44

not going to if to see that running

25:47

from me, i'm not gonna just dog

25:49

him i'm not going to send my dog on him

25:52

because i've got a petty theft

25:54

so this case right here is

25:56

the test that of directed

25:58

me on how i made visions as a canine

26:00

handler now i there

26:03

was another case where it was an armed robber

26:06

it was running from me and i set my dog

26:08

on him and my dog bit him and

26:11

caused quite a bit of damage to the guys lay

26:13

because he was trying to the

26:16

whole leg out of my dog's mouth and you

26:18

know he had some damage term but it was

26:21

as absolutely just fine and sending my dog

26:23

on

26:24

that guy and lines that's

26:27

an armed robbery

26:29

i mean the severity of the crime is

26:31

i dag ice the he poses

26:34

a threat the to

26:36

the public if he gets away the

26:39

honestly said to me i didn't think your dog

26:41

was gonna catch me before i got to that sense

26:44

a dog is only says there are thirty

26:46

five miles an hour to requests

26:48

syrups through an empty parking lot

26:51

way and shards

26:54

this is important we go back to the kilcoyne

26:57

episode

26:58

yeah and of watch

27:00

i remember

27:03

being an app pursuit i knew that we are

27:05

going to chase that car forever

27:08

regardless

27:10

the suspects driving behavior which

27:15

driving behavior and

27:17

circumstances the time the location

27:20

of where the pursuit as either heading towards

27:22

are going through is

27:24

why we have

27:26

you know we terminate pursuits speakers

27:29

the jews isn't worth the squeeze were

27:31

putting the public in more

27:33

danger than it's worth two

27:36

arrest the fleeing suspect even

27:39

know what a felony

27:40

the felony to elude the police in

27:44

that case and and kilcoyne case

27:46

i knew that we are going to chase that car

27:49

until it ran out gas or until

27:52

something

27:53

out it

27:57

the mountains where we were i

27:59

was

27:59

the only vehicle that had any radio

28:02

reception don't know

28:04

how that happened but my

28:06

car radios the only one that was working

28:08

for our agency and

28:11

when i heard that offs or kilcoyne

28:13

a big shot i knew this was a deadly force situation

28:16

you mean you know that you might have to

28:18

use deadly force brat

28:21

that james who is the first

28:23

officer

28:24

behind suspect's car i

28:27

knew he can ram

28:29

her off the side of of the hill

28:31

cause

28:33

if the use of force is justified

28:36

the resulting injuries are inconsequential

28:39

there's case law about vehicles

28:41

being pursued and using pit maneuvers

28:44

on vehicles that are going a high rate of speed beats

28:46

that it's inherently a deadly use of force

28:48

with your vehicle to spin

28:50

a suspect vehicle at high speeds

28:53

because there's a great chance that

28:55

someone's going to get seriously injured or killed

28:58

in that situation i knew the james

29:00

could push suspect

29:03

right outside of the hill

29:06

it's a creative way

29:08

in that situation and make sure that this

29:10

person who just shot a police officer

29:13

does market away james

29:16

how right along with him that night and james

29:18

was little bit worried that he

29:20

might put himself off the side of the road to

29:23

sir james did a great job once

29:27

in pursuit ended we came

29:30

to the top of a logging landing

29:32

and there's literally

29:34

gravel

29:35

then and the force begins there's

29:38

nowhere for suspect ago

29:41

that allows us to slow things down

29:44

not fleeing anymore

29:47

though the circumstances

29:49

changed but it was important for me

29:52

when i heard that the officer

29:54

been shot that other

29:56

people in our stack of cars

29:58

following suspect

30:00

need to be aware of that because change

30:03

the rules of engagement

30:05

that now

30:06

i know that i can shoot this person

30:09

if they're trying to get away from me because

30:11

that person is a danger to the public has

30:13

just killed somebody and is actively trying to

30:15

get away situation

30:17

just did not present itself the circumstances

30:20

weren't there i've been as many times

30:23

i can't we why didn't you shooter wasn't

30:26

there

30:27

the was never there for me the pull the

30:29

trigger and shoot the suspect because

30:32

i did not feel scared

30:35

for my safety or the others that were

30:37

with me the have the number

30:39

of guns that are pointed out her and she

30:41

just killed one of our brothers for

30:43

her to not get shot shows

30:47

how professional the

30:49

brothers and sisters that were up on that

30:52

mount not day

30:54

exceptional exceptional folks

30:57

did it the right way

30:59

i get the same question he

31:01

went there

31:03

so it works both ways you

31:05

weren't there to know why we

31:07

didn't shooter and the

31:09

situation where somebody does get shot you weren't

31:12

there

31:12

yeah

31:13

twenty twenty hindsight

31:15

so this case right here graham

31:17

first corner is especially important

31:20

this is a three pronged test right

31:22

severity of the crime whether

31:25

the suspect poses an immediate threat to

31:27

the safety of officers are others and whether

31:29

or not whether or she is actively

31:31

resisting arrest or attempting to flee

31:34

though some , cases recently

31:37

that this case law has been a part of

31:39

his the shooting of michael brown

31:41

in ferguson missouri missouri

31:43

the shooting of alton sterling in louisiana

31:47

and the derek shows in george boyd case

31:49

in minneapolis is

31:52

it reasonable for derek children to

31:55

have his knee or george foods neck for

31:58

eight plus minutes

32:00

no snow

32:02

that reasonable

32:03

i mean and it's not even close

32:06

when you look at it through the lens of reasonableness

32:10

the officers who have been trained in those

32:12

situations and have similar experience say

32:14

that's not reasonable

32:16

and

32:17

it

32:18

exceptionally important for people to realize

32:20

buses in the eyes of an officer

32:23

a similarly trained officer

32:25

with similar experience in the same situation

32:28

it's not

32:29

similar citizen

32:31

it's not a similar

32:34

the billion

32:36

it

32:37

i need to be judged based

32:40

on how other officers what

32:42

did interpreted that situation is it

32:44

reasonable there , it

32:46

there was a case several years ago now

32:49

i and i think it was in south carolina

32:51

where a man had run

32:54

from a traffic stop and

32:57

the officer shot him in the back and killed him add

33:01

i remember watching because there's actual video

33:03

that shooting and i remember watching

33:05

that video before i knew any of the facts of the

33:07

case as like

33:09

that looks unreasonable to

33:11

me you are losing the foot chase he

33:13

just shot him

33:15

then

33:16

the guy was merely running from a traffic

33:18

stop

33:19

not reasonable not reasonable

33:22

right so interesting

33:24

and complex

33:26

marbury one of the person's

33:28

convicted

33:30

the former investigator for the district

33:32

attorney's officer

33:34

not employed at the time was retired

33:37

it

33:38

was any that reasonable

33:40

the call the police

33:42

it's that simple these

33:44

guys created their own emergency by

33:46

chasing a mod arberry down

33:50

blocking his way and yeah

33:52

it's an approach him with a shotgun

33:55

it's

33:56

you just look at

33:57

done this this one unreasonable

34:01

a long time ago and now this happened

34:04

totally unreasonable

34:06

the ahmad arberry case sounds

34:08

circumstantially very similar

34:11

to tennessee verse garner

34:14

well and also zimmerman

34:16

the trailer nice yeah

34:17

i mean they said

34:20

in the a mod arberry case that

34:22

he was burglarizing a house that was under

34:24

construction and he was running and then they

34:26

shot him how similar

34:29

to tennessee verse garner

34:32

were got shot in the back of a

34:34

head trying to go over a fence after

34:36

the after party said i didn't think

34:38

he had a gun on him i didn't think he

34:40

deserved so

34:42

i know that the three defendants

34:44

in the armory case of probably claim

34:46

that are we thought he probably was armed and

34:49

but i think justice has

34:52

been served in that case

34:54

yeah you

34:56

consider connors stuff on graham

34:59

to be to meet the threshold

35:01

of this three pronged graham test

35:05

i understand

35:08

with a benefit of hindsight

35:11

we're not supposed to years i can

35:14

i put myself in that offs her shoes

35:17

without knowing everything that officers

35:20

experiencing i can understand why

35:22

he was

35:23

interested in what was going on with graham

35:25

i understand that it makes

35:27

sense to me it seems reasonable the reasonable the

35:29

be the

35:32

curious as to what graham

35:34

was up to so i understand where you're

35:36

coming from there that's

35:38

also why in those types of situations

35:41

i would also make sure that i had additional

35:45

probable cause to make the

35:47

traffic stop they

35:49

have violations on the vehicle

35:52

in that situation would situation follow

35:56

that car and without additional

35:58

pc would i would i pull that

35:59

moreover i probably would

36:02

the like a cannot know what

36:04

he's got we don't have any call

36:06

from the store saying hey somebody to shoplift

36:09

it from us that would be additional information

36:11

that would be now your beef get a righteous

36:13

stop absent that

36:16

for me personally i'd probably just follow that

36:19

car

36:20

try to get

36:21

my own pc for a traffic violation

36:23

and then do a traffic stop so i can

36:26

lawfully contact with

36:28

the benefit that's

36:32

me personally there's

36:35

so much gray area that's

36:37

not black and white lake

36:39

people wanted to be or that hops

36:43

would want to be

36:45

you operate in these gray areas

36:50

then you have case law that either supports

36:52

what you're doing or case law that says

36:55

no

36:56

you can't do that

36:58

these situations are not

37:01

they're very complicated

37:03

even simple situations like this

37:05

they are nuanced and their complicated

37:07

ads that's

37:10

why these cases are so important police

37:13

yeah well thank

37:15

you both for watching us through that

37:18

it so much to process while you're

37:20

making a split second decision

37:22

out in the field you

37:24

free during my ego smart

37:26

and superfan

37:28

class dismissed

37:30

we will see you next

37:50

there are associate producers

37:53

are arizona and the realm of smitty

37:55

our editors extraordinary our

37:57

laws in his tail and soaring nation