She still has a case.
“Outside the marshals, Henry’s lawsuit named Essex County and about 30 law enforcement officers and government officials in New Jersey and Pennsylvania as defendants, accusing them of abuse of process, false arrest and imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, failure to train and supervise and conspiracy.”
The only people with qualified immunity are the Marshals
Isn’t it odd that soldiers in Afghanistan couldn’t just start shooting in a situation like that? They had to audibly confirm they were being shot at before they could return fire.
Kind of nuts that a war zone had a more restrictive rule of engagement than an American street corner.
That’s the same standard that applies to you and me (in most States) for use of lethal force in self-defense … “imminent threat of severe injury or death.” Unfortunately, cops are usually given more latitude by the establishment. Case in point, Officer Byrd shooting Ashley Babbitt.
Who are the guilty ones.
Probably all of them.
The marshals are definitely.
Yes it is. I always thought it was crazy that if someone points a weapon at a service member, he has to wait until he gets permission to defend himself or is fired upon. I wonder how many people are in Arlington because of that rule.
The idea behind COIN is not accidentally kill civilians you need on your side. Thus the extra caution and more restrictive ROE.
The point is that cops shouldn’t have a free fire ROE on American streets.
They do not. They are the highest scrutinized profession in Planet Earth. But when someone points a firearm at them, they are allowed to fire before they are killed. As it should be.
This is some imagination. Most of their acts are subject to internal scrutiny. Calling that the highest scrutinized anything is silly but of course nobody should expect anything else.
This is some ignorance. They carry cameras and are on T.V. any time they are suspected of making a poor decision. How the hell are you not aware of this?
They aren’t scrutinized that hard.
If the suspect actually has a gun that’s one thing. But in many cases the suspect has a cell phone in their hands and one jittery cop screams “firearm” and then he gets four magazines emptied into him.
I wonder why people demanded they start keeping cameras recording them on duty? Can’t be because they were just gunning people down and using the excuse “I thought he had a gun” even though the suspect was unarmed.
Don’t over think it. It may have been because cops were tired of facing false accusations of brutality. A lot of lies are told about cops. Remember hands up don’t shoot? You need to be careful about condemning an entire profession that we absolutely depend on. Most are great people. Am I right?
They are not constantly on tv. Their cameras are subject to internal review and are publically released if and when their departments or their bosses feel it’s appropriate
They are subject to scrutiny and darn well should be. It’s not highest level anything.
Hahahah.
It may have been this thing you completely made up.
Incorrect. If there is a controversy, the public demands to see the video and a judge orders it released. It belongs to the people, not the “bosses.”
Hahaha. You lie. You are free to apologize if you are man enough.
What does your research show?
A 2018 survey by the Pew Research Center found that the majority of both police and the public favor body cameras,
No they are not.
And they have an extreme amount of blue privilege.
