POST SCRIPTS

hold the fleeing felon completely responsible, but there is a strong possibility the police could have done something better to prevent his escape and thus prevented the accident that followed.

When a wanted felon (Shayne Tinnel) was stopped in a police roadblock, a female driver jumped out of their vehicle and ran towards the police. She left the keys behind in the ignition and the vehicle running. This left Tinnel alone in the back seat for a few seconds then he leaped over the passenger seat and took the wheel to drive around a police road block in defiance of police orders to halt. My guess is police may have used too much restraint and didn't shoot him because they were unclear if this attempt to escape rose to the level of using deadly force.

The current law allows officers to use their weapons if it can be shown the offender presented an immediate and potentially lethal danger to the public. Unfortunately, the test or burden of proof required is inconsistent and unclear. This part needs to be fixed. The myriad of complicated case laws and the constant public criticisms of police who use deadly force often leave officers hesitating when they should be using their weapon.

Based upon my experience in law enforcement, I believe this particular situation did rise to a level where deadly force was justified. But, many others in our society, even in law enforcement might disagree. So, I can understand if those officers hesitated too long or chose to err on the side of caution and not fire their weapons at Tinnel.

Ok, now you be the judge: The suspect said he would not be taken alive, he had a history of violence and was wanted for a violent crime. When he made the choice to flee in a vehicle, he was in effect using a 5000 lb deadly weapon. His past and present actions have demonstrated a reckless disregard for the safety of others with a strong potential for great bodily harm or death should he flee in a vehicle. What would you do, would you shoot or peruse? Remember, a ricochet bullet could kill an innocent person nearby or you may actually have the wrong guy, ...so many things to consider, so many possibilities.

In this case I would take the chance and shoot. I have used deadly force twice before. In those situations I used my patrol car to ram the suspects vehicles, but it was still the use of deadly force and fortunately it all worked out. But, the point is I could have used my pistol, because deadly force was justified to save the public from great bodily harm or death by a fleeing felon.

In this latest situation, the Paradise officers had a reasonable expectation the suspect would pose a high risk for serious injury or death, if he fled. But, we know they didn't use every option available to them to stop Tinnel from fleeing possibly because they feared what might happen IF they failed to satisfy all the elements of what is termed a "good shoot".

They were in a real tough spot. To shoot or not to shoot, is one of the most serious choices an officer could ever make, but now that split second choice is clouded by so many legal technicalities, it's confusing and obstructing officers. That moment of indecision was all that was needed for this criminal predator to flee at high speed. As a direct result of his actions an innocent women died. Yes, the police were in pursuit, but this fatal accident could have happen whether that suspect was being pursued or not! So restraining police from pursuits guarantees nothing. However, we know for a fact IF the suspect had been stopped by deadly force during the initial traffic stop.... the accident would never have happened.

Restrain officers any more and you will only get more needless deaths of innocent people. The officers need backup, not to be trigger happy, but to simply do their job as the law intended The current law on use of deadly force is too ambiguous. The best way to honor the victim, Kathy Bogosian, is to empower the police with community support and the tools they need to do the job. This is the time to come down hard on the criminals, not the police.

One last thing and it's a big one. When the facts come finally are all in in this case, I think it would be really appropriate for the local law enforcement administrators involved in this to step up and give use their positions as community leaders. Too often they remain silent for some mistaken notion they must be neutral and never enter into a controversy. That's totally wrong...it's their job to support their officers and enlighten the public when these sort of situations come up! The media ought to pursue them for a statement if they fail to come forward on their own.