DISCUSSION BOARD- Analysis of the Case of Glenn Rightsell
Respond to 4 other students comparing their answers to yours. The response posts should be at least 125 words in length.
Angeleri
Should the prosecutor alone make the decision or should this have gone to a grand jury? There is no need for a grand jury in this case so the prosecutor should make the decision. I don’t believe there’s a way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this was not a self defense shooting. If there’s footage that exists of the actual shooting and Glenn is shown visibly putting his hand near his weapon in a motion where he could’ve put it up and shot at the trooper, that’s all the evidence that’s needed.
What areas of the law are concerning when citizen’s deal with law enforcement? In every crime or interaction with law enforcement, but mostly crimes, there’s plenty of elements that make up said crime. Though there was none committed in this case, aside from Glenn allegedly reaching for his firearm, it’s hard for citizens to prove their innocence vs law enforcement in court. A lot of the law is in their favor, and the elements that make up how certain things pan out tend to favor law enforcement over citizens.
Discuss any concerns that you find in the timelines. The one concern I had with the timeline was an important piece that could’ve prevented this tragedy to begin with. I wanted to know if and when dispatch advised the troopers on duty of the vehicle that Glenn called in and said he was returning to fix it and not to mess with it. Had the trooper had the knowledge of that instead of pulling up to the car he already marked abandoned then he wouldn’t have had the suspicion that someone was messing with the car. The trooper would’ve had proper knowledge that it was more than likely the owner working on it. Though he still should’ve asked for a name when he got there.
What changes to policy or law would you make so this does not happen again? Having officers arrive at all scenes with a set of questions they must ask to get an understanding of the situation should already be standard procedure, but in this case it seemed as if it was just an immediate suspicion. Which will naturally get anyone unnerved at the sight of seeing someone somewhere that should be abandoned. Even though it was revealed that Glenn Rightsell was legal to carry a firearm, without the knowledge of having one on him, combined with seeing one will get an officer nervous right from the get go. In the set of questions to ask there should obviously be one asking about weapons and in times where officers do ask that, more often than not do they get an honest answer. Officers having to ask a certain set of questions to anyone on any scene would be a helpful asset to officer safety and the people they’re interacting with. So that way there’s no false pretenses, assuming the truth is told by the party the officers talk to.
Response
Pfau
Should the prosecutor alone make the decision, or should this have gone to a grand jury?
This case should have gone to a grand jury, in my opinion. There are too many inconsistent factors to warrant one individual making a verdict. There are also many moving pieces to consider (the witnesses, the officer, the hospital staff, EMT). Whenever there is a police shooting where the use of force is questionable, there should always be a jury trial.
What areas of the law are concerning when citizen’s deal with law enforcement?
Police discretion and use of force are two big areas of concern. The use of deadly force should only be used per policy after the responding officer has exhausted all other means of de-escalation and only if their life (or the lives of others) is in immediate peril. Unfortunately, because of lack of training and discretion, there are instances like the Rightsell case we read about where officers may subjectively feel like their life is in danger, even if there is no objective evidence to suggest it.
Discuss any concerns that you find in the timelines.
There were a number of inconsistencies in this situation. The most obvious one is when the Officer claimed to have fired only three shots. However, later evidence suggests that he actually fired all six. This is proof of a knee-jerk reaction on his part. There is no situation where an officer needs to shoot six shots at an unarmed suspect. When Organ confronted Rightsell beside the broken down car, the suspect had his firearm strapped into its holster while the officer had his equipped at his side, showing that the officer had every advantage over the suspect before the shooting took place.
What changes to policy or law would you make so this does not happen again?
I would reinforce and reform the department’s policy on the use of deadly force. There should be certain criteria that have to be met before an officer can pull the trigger. One of these criteria is that they have exhausted all other means of force. If the officer felt threatened, although no evidence exists to support his claims that his life as in danger, they should have used vocal commands of their taser before resorting to deadly force. Of course, there are situations where deadly force is the first reaction. Situations where the officer is being shot at or the lives of civilians are in danger of immediate death. However, that’s why every case of police shooting needs to be investigated and corroborated.
Response
Bowie
Should the prosecutor alone make the decision or should this have gone to a grand jury?
In this particular case I feel this case should have went to a grand jury. Most of the information given was from the perspective of the Officer and law enforcement as Mr. Rightsell did not live to tell his side of the story. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Mr. Rightsell actually attempted to go for his gun other the the word of Officer Organ. Due to the fact that Mr. Rightsell when asked told the Nurse that he didn’t do anything and that the officer just started shooting, is reason enough that the perspectives of a grand jury on whether to bring charges would have been warranted. The Rightsell case was and is a very controversial case. If this case had gone to a grand jury, but charges were not brought against the officer perhaps people would have been able to accept the outcome better knowing that the grand jury looked at all of the evidence.
What areas of the law are concerning when citizen’s deal with law enforcement?
Some areas of concern for citizen’s when dealing with law enforcement is the fact that all an officer has to say is that he or she felt their life was in danger in order to shoot to kill. It doesn’t have to be proven that the officer life was in danger, and what someone thinks is really hard to determine.
Discuss any concerns that you find in the timelines.
Concerns I had with the timeline was that it took nearly 11 minutes to detain and take Mr. Rightsell into custody after he had been shot. Mr. Rightsell was not shown to be resisting arrest. I feel that there should have been more of a sense of urgency on the part of law enforcement. There was also close to 10 minutes after Mr. Rightsell was was taken in custody before he received any medical attention at the scene. This suggest to me that medical personnel was not called immediately or even remotely immediately after Mr. Rightsell had been shot. If medical personnel was on the scene earlier then perhaps they were not able to interfere with what the police were doing at the time. If Mr. Rightsell was taken into custody sooner and was able to get the medical attention he needed soon after being shot, he may have survived the shooting.
What changes to policy or law would you make so this does not happen again?
There should be a policy in place where the body cameras come on immediately and automatically when an officer is approaching a civilian in the manner that Office Organ approached Mr. Rightsell. There should also be policies mandating that dispatch is in better communication with officers regarding any situation involving that particular officer, as well as any officers near the scene or in the vicinity. The fact that Mr. Rightsell called and stated that he would be back to fix the car or remove it should have been communicated through dispatch.
Response
Gonzales
Should the prosecutor alone make the decision or should this have gone to a grand jury?
I feel that this is a big enough of a case where there is enough elements to say that more then one person needs to look at this because a potentially innocent person may have just been killed and this could’ve been avoided if communication is better. I don’t feel that only one person alone is able to look at the multitude of elements and happenings in this situation. I think there is many different ways to look at this case to say what is right and what is wrong and that’s why I feel the grand jury should come into play. Although you can argue the officer was justified to shoot Rightshell, there are many arguments that can be made as to why this was happening in the first place about how dispatch did not relay any known information about the situation.
What areas of the law are concerning when citizen’s deal with law enforcement?
I would a say a big area when law enforcement deal with citizens is they never know how the people are going to act and if they could be dangerous. Weapons are a big thing because nobody wants to get hurt and safety is a huge thing when it comes to officers who are just trying to do there job. People are allowed to have weapons but there are certain stipulations they have to follow and when a officer does not know what this person may do then this causes a conflict of interest where officer safety steps in.
Discuss any concerns that you find in the timelines.
A concern I possibly have is because the officer tagged this vehicle as abandoned earlier in the day so he slightly knew about it. It seems like when he saw it later with a subject working under the hood he would contact dispatch too see if the person of that vehicle had updated them possibly.
What changes to policy or law would you make so this does not happen again?
The Policy that needs to change would be dispatch needs to give updates when they receive them to police. They cannot hold back information even if it does not seem that important. Dispatch also needs to be on top of anyone that has a weapon on them and make sure they relay this information because it is crucial.
Response
My initial post
Should the prosecutor alone make the decision, or should this have gone to a grand jury?
The case should be left to the prosecutor, and essentially according to the American criminal justice system, prosecutors are considered the most influential people in a courtroom because they control and dictate the direction and outcome of all criminal cases. Additionally, given the sensitivity of the case, the jury can be biased because, based on the assignment, my personal opinion was that both Mr. Rightsell and the officer followed protocols; only a state of unclear communication led to the instance.
What areas of the law are concerning when citizen’s deal with law enforcement?
One of the areas of law that are concerning when individuals deal with law enforcement is civil rights. Civil rights law connotes the balance of the varying interests between government institutions and individuals. Such cases may involve discrimination or violation of human rights by law enforcement officials, unfair practices by government bodies, or infringement of rights and liberties. The second area is criminal law which focuses on the behaviors of citizens as indicated in the criminal code. Again these cases range from fundamental human rights, individual liberty, and responsibilities.
Discuss any concerns that you find in the timelines.
Criminal law is one of the most prevalent concerns that have existed for a long time. The concept of criminal law is found in the phenomenon of criminalization which connotes the act of making an action a criminal offense by deeming it illegal. It also extends to the act of turning an individual into a criminal. In Rightsell’s V State case, Officer Organ, during the altercation with Rightsell, deems his activity as illegal and fears his death thinking that Rightsell wanted to reach for his gun.
What changes to policy or law would you make so this does not happen again?
According to the case, there was poor communication between the office and the officer informing him about Mr. Rightsell’s request to be allowed to repair the vehicle. Therefore, to ensure that this does not happen again, effective communication within the office must be enforced through policies. Additionally, calling for backup, either personal or specialized equipment should also be made mandatory in case of a seemingly dangerous instance.
The post DISCUSSION BOARD- Analysis of the Case of Glenn Rightsell Respond to 4 appeared first on PapersSpot.
