There are few areas as controversial as the use of deadly force by police officers who are attempting to apprehend a fleeing suspect. The current fleeing felon rule authorizes the police to use deadly force to apprehend a felon who is fleeing from the police where the police officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or to others, including the public. With this current fleeing felon rule, a police officer may shoot a suspect running away from her in the back, if the suspect poses an immediate threat of harm to others.

Do you agree with a police officer being able to shoot a fleeing felon in the back if, for example, the suspect is running away holding a gun or some other type of weapon?

Question 2- In order for a police officer to stop and frisk ("pat down") a person for weapons, he or she must have reasonable suspicion. The officer must be able to articulate on why he or she detained a person and frisked them. Here's a scenario to consider:

It's a very hot summer day in Los Angeles. You are on patrol and notice a man walking back and forth in front of a bank and talking on his cell phone. He appears to be agitated and looking for someone. The man is wearing a thick fur-type overcoat jacket. Can you approach the man and "stop and frisk" him for weapons? Please explain your answer.

Question 3- The admissibility of fingerprint evidence is of utmost importance to the outcome of cases. There have been several court cases challenging the use of fingerprints as scientific evidence. People v. Jennings is a significant case in the History of Fingerprinting. After reading the article, discuss the Judge's ruling. The link to the article is below:

People v Jennings.pdf

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

ANSWER Question 1 Whether or not a police officer should be permitted to shoot a fleeing felon in the back is a contentious issue that balances the need for public safety with the protection of indivi... View the full answer