2015/11/13

A landmark decision issued by the Supreme Court earlier this week has made it more difficult to file a lawsuit against the police for using lethal force against fleeing suspects.

According to the ruling, unless it is “beyond debate” that using a weapon to kill a suspect is unwarranted the cops cannot be touched by a court case.

The legal bigwigs voted 8-1 in favor of the verdict, which concluded that a Texas police officer was innocent in a case alleging the use of excessive force.

On the night of March 23, 2010 the cop chose to ignore his supervisor’s advice and used a high-powered weapon to fire into a vehicle, which was leading the police on a chase.

The officer said he was hoping to stop the car, but instead he ended up fatally shooting the driver, Israel Leija Jr.

The officer in question, state trooper Chadrin Mullenix, heard about the hunt over his radio – apparently a man had fled from a drive-in restaurant and cops were pursuing him.

In order to stop him, the police decided to lay a strip of spikes across the highway.

This technique is used to deflate the tires of fleeing suspects’ vehicles.

After hearing the details, Mullenix drove to the spot on the highway.

His commander had ordered to stand by and assess if the spikes worked.

Mullenix, who had been previously condemned for not acting decisively enough, chose to ignore his commander’s orders.

Instead of waiting, the officer shot six times at Leija’s car, which killed him instantly.

In instances where officers are not arraigned, families occasionally decide to sue in federal court claiming a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Leija’s family did the same and filed a lawsuit.

The judge ordered for the case to proceed to a jury for a decision.

The US fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Mullenix did not have immunity, the full appeals court also upheld this decision.

However, after spending six weeks reviewing the matter the High Court issued its latest ruling suggesting that the officer is immune from being sued.

The current decision favors giving police officers the benefit of the doubt.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor has vehemently spoken out about the verdict.

She says there are major faults in the “shoot first, think later” line of attack.

According to her, in this case specifically, Mullenix was trying to prove that he could get down to business if need be.

This comes at a time when police shootings have caused a number of mishaps, including the death of a six-year-old autistic boy in Louisiana who just happened to be sitting in the passenger seat of his dad’s car.