As riots in immigrant communities rage in cities across France since the police shooting of a 17-year-old youth of Algerian background on Tuesday, I have been thinking a lot about the incident, not just because it has led to riots across the country, but because it recalls an incident I was involved in decades ago as a DEA agent in Los Angeles. The circumstances were almost the same.
We had just arrived at the home of a heroin dealer we were going to arrest. We knew that he was violent and was a user of PCP. As we were walking up to his house, we saw that he was pulling his car out of his driveway. It was late at night, and one of our agents pretended to stagger drunkenly onto the street and the driver stopped. At that point, he pulled out his badge as we all approached the car with the intent to pull the suspect out of the car. At that point, the suspect briefly accelerated and braked a couple of times, knocking the first agent out from in front of the car. He actually struck the agent twice.
Did this justify shooting the suspect at this point? Would it have been justified?
As it was, the first agent then shot at the left front tire in an effort to flatten the tire as the vehicle took off He only succeeded in putting a hole in his hubcap. At this moment, I was just feet away from the driver's side window and had a clear shot. I decided not to fire, partly because I saw a potential crossfire situation if one of my partners were to make a sudden move to his right and into my line of fire. Looking back, maybe I didn't think that the threshold for discharging my weapon had really been met. But I was very close to firing.
To make a long story short, no other shots were fired, a long car chase ensued before the suspect crashed on the side of the road and he was arrested. To this day, I thank God that I did not fire. Would it have been ruled justified, or would I have been prosecuted? I don't really know the answer to this day. Merely shooting at a fleeing felon is not an option for US federal agents unless the person fleeing poses a danger to the agents or others. An example would be a running gunfight. I was involved in one of those as well, but that is another story.
As I watch the French video, I see a similar situation. One officer is at the driver's side window, I assume talking to the driver. The other officer is leaning astride the left side of the hood with his weapon pointed at the driver. Someone is heard to say, "You are going to get a bullet in the head." Was this one of the cops? If so, is it ever permissible to say that to a suspect? If it that instant, the situation has become so dangerous, the answer in my view would be yes. There are many ways to warn a suspect that you are prepared to shoot, and at times, in the heat of the moment, the language isn't always so delicate.
It appears from the video that the second officer was forced off the left side of the hood by the acceleration of the suspect's vehicle. At that point, one of the officers fired a round into the chest of the driver as the vehicle was taking off.
At this point, I should mention that French law governing the use of deadly force by police may be different than American law. Many suspects have been shot by police in the US as they tried to run down an officer with their car-a deadly weapon. When that happens, the incident is closely analyzed, and when video is available, examined frame by frame. The key point under American law is whether the officer(s) felt that his/her life or that of another was in imminent danger. In some cases, it is clear. In other cases, not so much.
Different people may come to different conclusions as to whether the French cop leaning on the hood of the car was in imminent danger. That is the officer's version of the incident. While my natural inclination is to support the cops, I have to say this video does not look good from the police point of view. That said, the video does not show what or who might have been in the path of the car just ahead as it took off. (It crashed several dozen meters down the street.) We don't know what the cops saw in the car or everything that was said between the parties. If it turns out that the aforementioned statement was actually uttered by the driver, that would add an additional element to be considered. I also wonder what prompted the officer to point his weapon at the suspect just before he drove off. It should also be kept in mind that French police are operating in a very dangerous environment these days, and they are surely in a heightened state of awareness when confronting certain suspects in certain areas of the city. This particular young man had rather long history with the law for a 17-year-old.
Aside from the obvious societal issue involved (the riots and unrest in France's immigrant/Muslim community), there is a murder investigation to be resolved, and it will be closely watched. The officer has been charged with intentional homicide and placed into custody. The statements of President Emmanuel Macron do not help. Macron has basically convicted the cop in his initial reaction to the case.
So now France is facing a major investigation and possibly trial, which would be carried out under the greatest pressure. If the cop is not convicted and jailed for a long time, the cities will once again explode. While I am not ready to positively condemn or exonerate the actions of the officer, I would hate to see him convicted in a political trial just for the benefit of the mobs who would otherwise set France's cities on fire once again. The fate of the officer should be determined only by the facts of the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment