A Kansas officer shot a girl while aiming at her dog. Can he claim self-defense immunity?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kansas-officer-shot-girl-while-234507599.html
First off, the officer did NOT shoot her - freakin' BS reporting here. What happened was the bullet ricocheted and struck the girl. Fortunately she is fine.
Lower court rulings in favor of the officer have already been used as reasons not to charge other law enforcement officers in use-of-force cases...Dexter Betts responded to a domestic violence call. He shot at a dog, missed, and bullet fragments hit a girl who was in the line of fire.
Maloney conceded that Betts felt threatened, but he said the officer never articulated a fear of imminent death or great bodily harm, which is what justification for deadly force requires.
Since the ruling will apply outside of law enforcement scenarios, Biles said, the court should consider the effect on hypothetical scenarios. His example was a crowded concert where a person faces a reasonable threat. "If they've got a gun, they can just start shooting," Biles said of the statute. "And regardless of how many people drop, they're going to have immunity, as long as you can show the threat was there while the trigger's being pulled."
Betts fired two shots at the dog. Both bullets missed their mark. At least one ricocheted off the floor, and fragments hit a 9-year-old in a toe and above her eye. The girl had been sitting on the floor behind the dog. The miniature English bull terrier, named Chevy, was also hit by bullet fragments. "Here we are four years later," Hoeme said. "It's really easy for us to talk about ... he could have done this, he should have done that." The court took the case under advisement. A decision from the justices is likely several months away.
Mike Tyson said "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."