After less than a day of deliberations, a San Francisco jury
came to the conclusion that four police officers did not use excessive force
when firing at least 48 rounds into Alex Nieto. This begs the questions, what
is excessive force if 48 bullets to
stop one person is not?
The facts of this case are nothing
new. In this most recent version of this story, the police officers fatally
shot a young man after the officers mistook a stun gun for an actual gun.
Before firing at Nieto, the officers requested that he put his hands up. Rather
than follow the officers orders. Nieto pulled out a stun gun from his pocket
and this tragic incident ensued.
Everyone, Shoot to
Kill
From the police point of view, it could be understandable
that their lives were in danger when Nieto refused to listen to their commands
and immediately reached for a gun. To the officers, this act by Nieto raised extreme
safety concerns.
However, with four officers on the scene, was it really necessary
for each officer to fire an average of 12 bullets each at the victim? But a
jury saw the barrage of bullets as a necessary evil given the situation.
Excessive force will be hard to define following a case like
this. If 48-plus bullets to stop one man doesn’t seem excessive to a jury, then
where is the line drawn. While police safety is extremely important in
situation like this, Nieto’s stun gun could not have been confused for a
high-powered assault weapon that would do serious damage to a group of armed
police men.
In the mind of Nieto’s family and many others around the
country, one bullet from each officer would probably suffice to reduce any apparent
threat that might be brewing. But 48 shots? Forty-eight of anything seems
pretty excessive, especially when it comes to stopping one man with a gun.
Related Links:
- Jury in Nieto trial finds SF cops did not use excessive force [SFGate]
- What Is Excessive Force? [ABC News]
- Police Misconduct and Civil Rights [FindLaw]
No comments:
Post a Comment