What are the standards governing use of deadly force by the police? Specifically, I'm wondering when...?

Question

...if ever, police are allowed to use their firearms against a fleeing suspect. Presume the suspect is actively fleeing, back turned to the officer(s). Is there ever a circumstance in which firing upon a fleeing suspect is permitted? Please only answer if you KNOW, not if you THINK, ASSUME, etc... thanks!

Answer 1

Each state has its own law governing it but they are usually pretty similar. I work in North Carolina and NC General Statute 15A-401 covers use of force. The statute has this to say about lethal force (this is the exact section of the law dealing with lethal force):

A law‑enforcement officer is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person for a purpose specified in subdivision (1) of this subsection only when it is or appears to be reasonably necessary thereby:

a. To defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force;

b. To effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person who he reasonably believes is attempting to escape by means of a deadly weapon, or who by his conduct or any other means indicates that he presents an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to others unless apprehended without delay; or

c. To prevent the escape of a person from custody imposed upon him as a result of conviction for a felony.

Nothing in this subdivision constitutes justification for willful, malicious or criminally negligent conduct by any person which injures or endangers any person or property, nor shall it be construed to excuse or justify the use of unreasonable or excessive force.

It is possible to legally shoot someone in the back. Lets say you have a guy with a big ax and he has hacked up a couple people and you approach him. The guy is ranting and raving about how god told him he had to kill all the sinners today. The guy then turns and runs down the street. This man has already shown that he will use deadly force. He is talking about killing others. And it is possible if he is not stopped that he will kill other. His back is to you as he runs down the street......read section b. above.
That is an extreme case obviously but I wanted to make it obvious to prove a point.

The news story would read something like:
"Crazed cop shoots fireman in the back as he trys to save woman from burning house."

Answer 2

In the land of Cheese, the use of deadly force is authorized when an Officer believes it is necessary to prevent the death or great bodily harm of him/herself or to others.

It doesn't apply to just firearms. It is the use of any means or instrumentality that will likely cause death.

As for the fleeing suspect. The Court case is Garner v. Tennessee. An Officer can use deadly force against a fleeing suspect if the subject has been/is known to be armed and has shot at an Officer in the past.

Or during the course of a pursuit, shoots at the Officer following him.

Answer 3

"Is there ever a circumstance in which firing upon a fleeing suspect is permitted?"

Certainly. If for instance a wanted felon is fleeing from the cops, or their is a chase, then the cops can shoot him in the back. If the suspect is considered dangerous, the police must prevent his escape in anyway possible (the logic being that if he escapes he could harm others); so, they are allowed to use deadly force if necessary. Note, however, that it is only "supposed" to be used when absolutely necessary for the safety of other citizens. In contrast, if the suspect had like two broken legs and was attempting to crawl away, it wouldn't be okay to use deadly force, as it is not reasonably necessary in order to prevent his escape/stop the danger.

It has to do with whether the suspect is armed, what crime he committed (i.e. it wouldn't be okay to shoot a shoplifter in the back as he fled Wal-mart with two CDs), the ability to prevent the suspect's escape by other means, etc.

Answer 4

If the fleeing suspect constitutes an immediate threat to the officer (suspect has a weapon in hand) or the public the suspect can be brought down in some states. It is in most cases the officer's discretion and "take" on the situation. No one wants to have to use deadly force if not absolutely necessary and we have a very short window in which to reach a decision to use It or not. In my state we have a very high ratio of police involved shootings. Most if not all inquiry's ended with the officers being cleared of any wrong doing..Nevada, Las Vegas especially, is petty intolerant towards the bad guys. I work in this city

Answer 5

Looks like a lot of people above have the right answer. Yes each State does have its own laws regarding use of force however they are all very similar in application. Keep in mind a law enforcement agency can be even more strict with guidlines regarding use of force than the state within their general orders.

In a nut shell the answer is yes an officer is permitted to use deadly force if he believes the escape of the suspect possess an imminent threat and if the suspect does escape there is a risk of death or great bodily harm to him or someone else.

Example: You respond to a call of a fight in progress in the ally way. As you arrive you see a male standing over another male stabbing him with a knife. The suspect runs with a knife in hand toward a group of bystanders two blocks away.

You are legally justified in shooting the subject, in the back if necessary, if you can articulate he possess an imminent risk to others in the area with a knife heading towards others.

I can go on and on with different examples on shoot and don't shoot situations. Keep in mind an officer has a split second to decide if using deadly force is warranted in each situation.

Good luck...

Answer 6

Law enforcement officers are authorized to use deadly force only when it is reasonable and necessary to protect the officer or others from an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person. It differs by state but I think that most agencies use a Use of Force Continuum. You use only that level of force necessary for the situation. If a felon is fleeing and he/she is armed and dangerous and poses a risk to the public or to other officers, then shooting CAN be justified.. But you have to be able to articulate it VERY well. Now, if someone stole a car, jumped out of the car and fled on foot, then ummm, an officer would have a very hard time articulating why he shot the person.

Answer 7

The laws are a little different in every state but deadly force is generally authorized when a person's actions pose a threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to an innocent third party, PROVIDED the use of deadly force will not put innocent bystanders at risk.

As for the "fleeing felon"; deadly force is generally not authorized unless the person poses an imminent risk to the public. (For example, a guy has a shotgun and he's running towards the front door of a nursery school)

Answer 8

no person, no longer police or protection rigidity (different than in conflict) or civilian, can use deadly rigidity different than in self-protection, or to guard an harmless 0.33 social gathering from death or grevious actual harm. A policeman won't be able to shoot a fleeing felon till he's armed and an drawing near danger to others. The information and circumstances be sure if a bona fide case of protection exists. some states (at the same time with Texas or Florida) have statutes which permit wider variety in what constitutes self-protection. there is an ongoing criminal controversy as to 'crimes of hobby' or secure practices of property, which (opposite to prevalent opinion) are no longer technically defenses nor mitigation, besides the shown fact that below Texas Penal Code 9.02, delivers a justification for using deadly rigidity to guard ones domicile from drawing near housebreaking or arson at night if there is not any non-deadly determination. Texas is unique in this. needless to say a policeman who's a knowledgeable professional and whose activity is to guard others might have an extra ordinary activity in setting up that using deadly rigidity develop into suitable than might a gang-member who develop into unlawfully carrying a weapon, however the assumption is the comparable.

Answer 9

It is the same for the police as well as for regular citizens in defending themselves. If a person has been presented with a lethal threat like a man pointing a weapon at them, or he is doing something threatening that could be assumed to be deadly like reaching for a weapon, then deadly force can be use. Deadly force may also be used to protect the lives of others. A word of caution here, looks are deceiving, and I would leave the rescuing to the police.

Answer 10

In Canada there is a stipulation in the Criminal Code that allows force that is likely to cause serious bodily harm or death on a fleeing suspect if there is reason to believe that there is an imminent and serious danger of death or serious bodily harm to someone else by the suspect.

So if someone has just murdered someone and has said that they are going to go to the high school and kill someone else, you would be justified in shooting this person walking up to the school even with his/her back turned if he/she refused to stop.

This also applies to fleeing inmates of a jail if they are believed to be dangerous to the public.