Singing Loudly

don't worry about the consequences if you happen to be a police officer in Harris County. I guess that the grand jury in Houston decided that it's excusable for an officer to use deadly force to kill a man who is in the process of climbing a fence to flee. Of course, the officer's testify that the reason the man was climbing the fence was to retrieve a shot gun.

What's the problem here? First, it isn't exactly apparent that there was imminent danger. Second, when someone is simply fleeing, and there isn't imminent danger to the officer, he shouldn't use more force than necessary to stop the suspect. Third, do you know how long it would take to actually jump a fence, get it ready to fire, and shoot? Finally, if, as the officer testified, the dead suspect fired a shot at the officer, why would he be trying to get a shotgun?

Take note, this isn't a situation where the officer witnessed the crime. He was relying on a phone call and suspected these guys were the ones who fled. As I have noted, Assistant District Attorneys have the power to shape when there are going to be no-bills and when there won't based on how they advice the grand jury. These unresolved issues that I point out should probably be resolved in open court.