agent charge in shooting in US Virgin Islands

[wipfel]

i'm getting more and more reluctant to take a chance by intervening in an unknown dispute/situation.

According to accounts by the ATF and Rep. Lee, Clark left his apartment that morning and found his neighbor Marguerite Duncan crying and trembling.

"She pleaded for his help, knowing that Clark was a federal agent," Lee wrote to congressional colleagues in a June 30 letter trying to stir support for his resolution backing the agent.

The woman's boyfriend, Marcus Sukow, who was naked and supposedly intoxicated, reportedly started pounding on her car hood and throwing large landscaping rocks.

According to Lee, Clark tried calming the man, to no avail. The man allegedly made threats and eventually came charging at Clark with a Maglite flashlight, which is considered a potentially lethal weapon. The agent opened fire, killing Sukow.

An ATF shooting review panel found that Clark acted reasonably in the situation.

......

"After reviewing the facts of the case, along with interviewing several witnesses, which included an attorney, a former prosecutor and a security guard, the U.S. Virgin Islands Attorney General concluded that the Agent Clark acted with excessive force," she wrote. "Moreover, the domestic abuse victim to whose defense he came has also stated that his response to the incident was excessive."

ATF Defends Agent William Clark in Virgin Islands Murder Rap

[peejman]

I suspect the excessive force ruling is because he's a government agent likely trained in hand-to-hand combat and is expected to be able to defend himself without using his firearm. Cops aren't allowed to shoot a perp when they decide a wrestling match is in order. There's a different standard for a trained government agent and a civilian.

[TN-popo]

Based on what I've read, Agent Clark's actions were totally justified.

[Fallguy]

IMO I think the agent was justified as well.

I think part of the problem is the occupation (or former occupation) of some of the witnesses.

But definetly an example of how a good intentions can end in bad circumstances.

[TN-popo]

I suspect the excessive force ruling is because he's a government agent likely trained in hand-to-hand combat and is expected to be able to defend himself without using his firearm. Cops aren't allowed to shoot a perp when they decide a wrestling match is in order. There's a different standard for a trained government agent and a civilian.

Wrong.

When a suspect attacks two people with blunt force weapons, generally deadly force is authorized.

There is no "different standard."

[Fallguy]

I suspect the excessive force ruling is because he's a government agent likely trained in hand-to-hand combat and is expected to be able to defend himself without using his firearm. Cops aren't allowed to shoot a perp when they decide a wrestling match is in order. There's a different standard for a trained government agent and a civilian.

Wrong.

When a suspect attacks two people with blunt force weapons, generally deadly force is authorized.

There is no "different standard."

I have to agree...a non-goverment agent can't shoot someone because they don't want to wrestle or take an a$$ whoopen either. No matter who you are, you have to have a resonable fear of imminent death or serioud bodily harm. If you have that fear, just because you may have additional trainging doesn't automaticlly make your shoot unjustified.

Of course I have no idea of the political climate on weapons etc... in the Virgin Islands, but it is probably not much better than NY or CA and that probably has a lot to do with it as well.

[JayC]

I suspect the excessive force ruling is because he's a government agent likely trained in hand-to-hand combat and is expected to be able to defend himself without using his firearm. Cops aren't allowed to shoot a perp when they decide a wrestling match is in order. There's a different standard for a trained government agent and a civilian.

Can you show me where it says that in the law? Last time I checked, at least here in TN the standard for when somebody can legally use deadly force (or serious bodily harm) are pretty much the same for citizens and LEO's. There are a couple of cases where LEO's can use it and civilians can't, but none of those exceptions involve a leveling of training requirement.

Maybe US territories have different laws, but I find it unlikely that the law dictates that you must resolve a threat of serious bodily injury differently depending on your level of training. Either the mag light posed a serious threat or it didn't, you ability to try and fight the person in hand to hand combat doesn't make a difference under the law.

[vontar]

See last line in my signature.

[Guest Boogieman]

I suspect the excessive force ruling is because he's a government agent likely trained in hand-to-hand combat and is expected to be able to defend himself without using his firearm. Cops aren't allowed to shoot a perp when they decide a wrestling match is in order. There's a different standard for a trained government agent and a civilian.

A wrestling match would require taking the chance of losing your firearm in the scuffle and being shot to death with your own gun should the perp get ahold of it. This without knowing what kind of training your opponent has or what kind of "superman drug" they have been smoking, snorting, or shooting up. At the end of the day I want to come home to my wife and if that means shooting versus wrestling I'll pick shooting any day of the week.

[Guest jlsprouls]

+1 Justified. Blunt object is deadly force.