Mass. Supreme Court Deems Fleeing the Police is Justified

[Boreas]

We do not eliminate flight as a factor in the reasonable suspicion analysis whenever a black male is the subject of an investigatory stop. However, in such circumstances, flight is not necessarily probative of a suspect's state of mind or consciousness of guilt. Rather, the finding that black males in Boston are disproportionately and repeatedly targeted for FIO [Field Interrogation and Observation] encounters suggests a reason for flight totally unrelated to consciousness of guilt. Such an individual, when approached by the police, might just as easily be motivated by the desire to avoid the recurring indignity of being racially profiled as by the desire to hide criminal activity. Given this reality for black males in the city of Boston, a judge should, in appropriate cases, consider the report's findings in weighing flight as a factor in the reasonable suspicion calculus."

http://www.wbur.org/news/2016/09/20/...to-flee-police

[donquixote99]

An unusual sort of ruling--it is seldom that the courts say one has any right to do anything but submit to law enforcement. A good anti-profiling ruling.

[Tom Joad]

Good.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

An unusual sort of ruling--it is seldom that the courts say one has any right to do anything but submit to law enforcement. A good anti-profiling ruling.

The thing that bothers me about it is that, while the ruling says that flight isn't probative, it still acknowledges it to be grounds for suspicion and, by implication, sufficient to warrant pursuit where the police can get up to all sorts of mischief. The only thing it would seem to rule out is the application of deadly force merely as a response to flight. That's something, I guess.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by Boreas

The thing that bothers me about it is that, while the ruling says that flight isn't probative, it still acknowledges it to be grounds for suspicion and, by implication, sufficient to warrant pursuit where the police can get up to all sorts of mischief. The only thing it would seem to rule out is the application of deadly force merely as a response to flight. That's something, I guess.

Yeah, it doesn't go far enough, but It's better than nothing.

If it was up to me, I'd make it legal for black dudes to return fire when fired upon by the cops.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Yeah, it doesn't go far enough, but It's better than nothing.

If it was up to me, I'd make it legal for black dudes to return fire when fired upon by the cops.

This is legal (at least in some jurisdictions), but you'd better be able to show you were resisting not unlawful arrest, but the unlawful threat of serious bodily harm. And in the case of police officers, with so many legal assumptions on their side, that 'unlawful threat' part can be very tough indeed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plummer_v._State

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

This is legal (at least in some jurisdictions), but you'd better be able to show you were resisting not unlawful arrest, but the unlawful threat of serious bodily harm. And in the case of police officers, with so many legal assumptions on their side, that 'unlawful threat' part can be very tough indeed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plummer_v._State

It can be impossible.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...917-story.html

[Tom Joad]

If I'm ever on a jury and it's a black guy on trial for shooting a cop, I'm voting "Not Guilty". I don't care what the circumstances are.

[barbara]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

If I'm ever on a jury and it's a black guy on trial for shooting a cop, I'm voting "Not Guilty". I don't care what the circumstances are.

Continuing to compromise our justice system is such a good solution. 😏

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by barbara

Continuing to compromise our justice system is such a good solution. 😏

It's already a done deal that when a cop shoots a black guy the cop gets off scott free, no matter what. All I'm proposing is to try to restore some balance.