Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Daniel Shaver shooting
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="donner" data-source="post: 3061137" data-attributes="member: 277"><p>Over thanksgiving we drove back to Oklahoma and i had time to catch up on some podcasts. One of them, from the folks at Radio Lab is called More Perfect and deals with the SCOTUS and it's decisions.</p><p></p><p>One of the episodes i found very interesting is this one, <a href="http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect-mr-graham-reasonable-man/" target="_blank">Mr. Graham and the Reasonable Man</a>. It deals with the case that gave us the 'reasonable officer' standard for use of force against citizens. While it gets a bit much at times (their legal editor is getting my on nerves when he is interviewed), one of the things that it goes into great depth about is the idea that officers are to be judged by whether their actions were appropriate 'at that moment'. </p><p></p><p>[USER=13624]@Dave70968[/USER] can probably go into better detail about things than i can, and i'm probably screwing up parts of the story, but the idea is that the stuff surrounding a use of force (i.e. everything you see in the video up to when the guy moves and is shot) isn't really considered. It's just was the use of force appropriate at that moment (i.e. did the officer 'fear for his life').</p><p></p><p>It's really an interesting look at how we arrived here and how courts have looked at the Graham decision. </p><p></p><p>As backstory, Graham (the individual who brought the case to the SCOTUS) was having a diabetic reaction when he was pulled out of a car by the police who thought he *might* have shoplifted from a gas station since an officer saw him go in and then exit quickly. (He hadn't stole anything, btw) The cops said he was drunk, cuffed him and were generally not nice to him. After they realized what was going on, they took him home him and left him in his front yard.</p><p></p><p>He won at the SCOTUS level and still lost at the state level because the jury thought the officer's actions in the moment were acceptable use of force. It's really an interesting story.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="donner, post: 3061137, member: 277"] Over thanksgiving we drove back to Oklahoma and i had time to catch up on some podcasts. One of them, from the folks at Radio Lab is called More Perfect and deals with the SCOTUS and it's decisions. One of the episodes i found very interesting is this one, [URL='http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect-mr-graham-reasonable-man/']Mr. Graham and the Reasonable Man[/URL]. It deals with the case that gave us the 'reasonable officer' standard for use of force against citizens. While it gets a bit much at times (their legal editor is getting my on nerves when he is interviewed), one of the things that it goes into great depth about is the idea that officers are to be judged by whether their actions were appropriate 'at that moment'. [USER=13624]@Dave70968[/USER] can probably go into better detail about things than i can, and i'm probably screwing up parts of the story, but the idea is that the stuff surrounding a use of force (i.e. everything you see in the video up to when the guy moves and is shot) isn't really considered. It's just was the use of force appropriate at that moment (i.e. did the officer 'fear for his life'). It's really an interesting look at how we arrived here and how courts have looked at the Graham decision. As backstory, Graham (the individual who brought the case to the SCOTUS) was having a diabetic reaction when he was pulled out of a car by the police who thought he *might* have shoplifted from a gas station since an officer saw him go in and then exit quickly. (He hadn't stole anything, btw) The cops said he was drunk, cuffed him and were generally not nice to him. After they realized what was going on, they took him home him and left him in his front yard. He won at the SCOTUS level and still lost at the state level because the jury thought the officer's actions in the moment were acceptable use of force. It's really an interesting story. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Daniel Shaver shooting
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
