This type of killing happens several times a week in the US. There are rules when leathal force can be used, when the police officer feels 'threatened'. But the rules are ignored and the definition of threatened is ambiguous. In this instance, the victim removing his hat had police led the police to feel their lives were in danger. The law is very strange in the...
There is a lesson to be learned there. If an Armed Policeman, or three tell you to "stand still with your hands in the air" it is not a good idea to do something else however tempting it may be!
evidence of murder would require demonstration of malice aforethought, wouldn't it? i don't see that the video - or accompanying report - can possibly suggest that the police set out with the intention of killing anybody.
"Federal Judge has ordered a suburban Los Angeles city on Tuesday to release video of the fatal shooting of an unarmed man two years ago by Gardena police after concerted efforts by media organisations£
Its quite clear that after 2 years the truth is beginning to come out. Yet another case of the trigger-happy American Police acting like a law unto themselves. Thanks goodness that wide-spread use of firearms is not common over here.
This next bit speaks volumes :::
"The city of Gardena, a part of Los Angeles, ultimately settled with the family of the victim for $4.7 million (£3 million) "
This type of killing happens several times a week in the US. There are rules when leathal force can be used, when the police officer feels 'threatened'. But the rules are ignored and the definition of threatened is ambiguous. In this instance, the victim removing his hat had police led the police to feel their lives were in danger.
The law is very strange in the US, fortunately our gun laws are far more stingent, and our police do not routinely carry guns.
My point here is that the Police have to be accountable, and in this case it has taken two years and a Federal Judge to get this video evidence released.
If the City and the Police thought that they had done nothing wrong, then they should have come clean in the first place. It should be up to a Jury to decide if a crime has been committed, although one hopes that none of the people that served in the Rodney King jury are still around to be called up again.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.