11th Circuit Holds Warning Not Always Required Before Using Deadly Force

[pshift]

11th Circuit Holds Warning Not Always Required Before Using Deadly Force — FEDagent

The Eleventh Circuit wrote that it could not view the officer’s actions “with the 20/20 vision of hindsight” and that qualified immunity leaves “room for mistaken judgments.”

www.fedagent.com

 

[Truebeliever]

The important part from the decision that needs to highlighted:

“On those facts, the court held there was no established requirement for the officer to warn Powell before he raised his gun, and that “giving a warning in the one second between [Powell] raising his gun and Snook firing wasn’t feasible.” “—From the original posters source.
The basis of the lawsuit was that the officer that he didn’t give a warning as the victim raised his gun at him.
Lawsuits are often decided like this because the plaintiff attempts to sue on novel grounds rather than established methods like suing the 911 caller who was wrong when they reported a domestic with shots fired from that house. The court says “ may have been wrong” and not that he was wrong that the homeowner was a threat in 20/20 hindsight. They are saying it doesn’t matter because in the moment it was reasonable for the officer to believe he was.
And you would too.