With the memorial to Thomas Ball in mind, a man chewed up and spit out by the family court system, I wanted to share a lawsuit against a police officer who illustrates the unintended consequences of using state violence to address thee non-violent problems of someone not paying their obligated child support.
The case is Henry v. Purnell, No. 08-7433 and it is from the 4th Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. The case is another instance of a police officer “accidently” using a gun to shoot someone running away in lieu of a Taser.
From Findlaw.com:
In a Section 1983 action arising from the fatal shooting of a suspect wanted for misdemeanor failure to pay child support, summary judgment in favor of defendant-police officer is reversed because: 1) although defendant intended to use his Taser rather than his gun to stop fleeing suspect, Tennessee v. Garner prohibits shooting suspects who pose no significant threat of death or serious physical threat; and 2) defendant’s use of force could be viewed by a jury as objectively unreasonable.Â
Yeah, I’d say that blasting a non-violent person with lead “could be” construed as “objectively unreasonable.” When you use state violence to solve non-violent problems, this is what happens. People get shot. Over owed child support.
If you think these cases are rare, you’d be incorrect. This particular case came out yesterday. I only chose to share it with you now in reflection of Mr. Ball’s memorial.
CORRECTION: Findlaw was incorrect in their syllabus stating that the man in this case was murdered. The man thankfully lived through this encounter, but it clearly could have turned out far worse.
Thank you to NGDGT for catching that error.
