Read on Twitter
1/ A few words about the Fifth Circuit's opinion holding that officers did NOT behave unreasonably when they set someone on fire (with a taser) to prevent him from setting himself on fire. https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/20/20-10055.0.pdf
2/ Case law on police violence is not good.
Legal doctrines on the use of force are too lax. And qualified immunity wraps those doctrines in an added layer of deference for police violence. I've written about these problems here: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/27/beyond-black-lives-matter-police-reform-legal-action
Legal doctrines on the use of force are too lax. And qualified immunity wraps those doctrines in an added layer of deference for police violence. I've written about these problems here: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/27/beyond-black-lives-matter-police-reform-legal-action
3/ Despite that case law, some bad decisions are not inevitable.
Many cases are not controlled by precedent but instead by a court's view of THE FACTS.
Many cases are not controlled by precedent but instead by a court's view of THE FACTS.
4/ And how judges view the facts depends on their values and their understanding of social context.
The view that police can reasonably hurt people who might hurt themselves, as the Fifth Circuit concluded here, is not compelled by the Constitution or any SCOTUS decision.
The view that police can reasonably hurt people who might hurt themselves, as the Fifth Circuit concluded here, is not compelled by the Constitution or any SCOTUS decision.
5/ So please remember:
Flawed case law doesn't mean judges are always constrained to rule against victims of police violence. Facts matter. And how judges view those facts really, really matters.
/END/
Flawed case law doesn't mean judges are always constrained to rule against victims of police violence. Facts matter. And how judges view those facts really, really matters.
/END/
