Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor just issued a powerful dissenting opinion against her fellow Supreme Court justices, who just let a killer cop walk.
The dissenting opinion called out the justices for their approach to letting cops get away with shooting first and thinking later.
This became particularly highlighted in a recent dismissal of a case involving a police officer who shot a fleeing suspect in Texas.
“Shoot first, think later” is not our analysis of Sotomayor’s critique, these are her very words.
Just Monday, the Supreme Court dismissed the aforementioned 2010 case of the shooting death of Israel Leija, Jr. In that case, Leija was shot during a high speed police chase that got up to 110 miles per hour.
Police set up road spikes to stop the car, then State Trooper Chadrin Mullenix of the Texas Department of Public Safety decided that shooting at the care would be even better, but his supervisor told him to back off and let the spikes do their job.
Mullenix ignored his supervisor and and shot up the vehicle anyway. An autopsy revealed four of the six shots he fired hit Leija.
But the court ruled that police immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law. ”
They didn’t think this counted.
Sotomayor disagreed, stating that “by sanctioning a ‘shoot first, think later’ approach to policing, the Court renders protections of the Fourth Amendment hollow.”
She noted that Mullenix “fired six rounds in the dark at a car traveling 85 miles per hour. He did so without any training in that tactic, against the wait order of his superior officers, and less than a second before the car hit spike strips deployed to stop it.”
Do you think the officer should have gotten off? Or was this at the very least negligent homicide?
(Article by M. David; image by #Op309 Media)