[Peace-discuss] Police policy on lethal force

[John W.]

Beyond all this discussion of procedure, I would think that Champaign's new
use of deadly force policy is flat-out illegal.  At least I've heard
virtually all my life that a cop can't shoot a fleeing felon.  That's why,
in all the crime movies and TV shows, the cop chases the fleeing felon on
foot for blocks and blocks and over fences and rooftops and so on.  If it
were legal, it'd be much easier to stop the fleeing felon by simply shooting
him in the back.



On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:18 PM, LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at advancenet.net>wrote:

  I concur that Barbara’s bringing it out into the light of day and focusing
> public attention not only on the change in the “Deadly Force” policy but  on
> the substance of the  new provisions in that changed policy was very
> important and relevant to not only the this particular incident being
> discussed but policy and policy making in Champaign in general.  I have to
> admit that I was caught unawares of this change although I was not really
> surprised by the substance of the change in that I sort of expected such
> changes – even though not as extreme or vague as this.  I was really
> offended by the non-transparent nature of the process  by which such a
> changes in policy were developed, instituted, and became part of the
> established policy without any public hearings, any public discussion or
> formal official approval of the City Council, or publication of the new
> policy allowing the public easy access to its content. The changes are not
> mere mundane administrative changes such as the introduction of new data
> collection and assemblage forms and processes, new uniforms and dress codes,
> new complaint response protocols, etc. that affect routine internal police
> operations; they are significant and substantive changes in the scope and
> range of permissible  police discretionary behaviors and  of approved
> courses of action by officers in the field.
>
>
>
> The most significant question that the establishment of this new policy
> raises revolves more around the general issues than issues pertaining to
> this particular tragic incident. The focus should be on issues of
> transparency in the administrative policy making process, the public
> participation in the process by which such policies are considered,
> developed, and established, the need for elected officials to officially
> vote on and approve policy changes when they are substantive in nature as
> contrasted to merely mundane procedural changes in substantive policies or
> changes in procedural policies, and the making public aware of all such
> policies and policy changes and  their contents easily accessible to the
> public in written form.  There should be an insistence on all administrative
> policies, rules, and regulations being published in written form and easily
> available to the public before they can be made effective.  There are too
> many administrative policies, rules, regulations, and routine operating
> procedures that are informal unwritten in nature, that are uncoedified ,
> that are vague as well as ambiguous as to their meaning and concrete
> applicability so as to be capricious or allow for capricious implementation
> in actual concrete ciscumstances.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:
> peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] *On Behalf Of *John W.
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 12:14 PM
> *To:* C. G. Estabrook
> *Cc:* Peace-discuss List; Barbara kessel
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Police policy on lethal force
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:41 AM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
> wrote:
>
> Barbara--
>
> Your comments last night on the changes in the police policy document on
> lethal force seem to me very important indeed.  Nice work.
>
> I hope they will be followed up.  How e.g. is the policy established?  City
> council who permitted it must be retired.
>
> Regards, Carl
>
>
>
> For those who haven't read it and didn't hear Danielle's comments last
> night, the policy says,
>
> "A peace officer is justified in using deadly force only when ... such
> force is necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by resistance
> or escape."
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20091021/b7cac092/attachment.htm