The Story Of Our Firm | En Español
 Home    Lawyers   Litigation   Why Choose Us?   Results   Search

Accident Lawyer Injuries False Arrest & Imprisonment Research Center Learn More

Deadly Force

in this section: Deadly Force | Non-Deadly Force | Police Misconduct: Police Brutality & False Arrest


Bookmark This Page Print This Page Email This Page

False Arrest Lawyer: Police Policy on Use of Deadly Force

If you're the victim of false arrest, fill out this simple form and get your free case review today.

The police are there to protect us and keep us safe. That is why police have policies on issues such as "Use of Force" that protect against police brutality and false arrest / false imprisonment. When those policies are violated or civilians (such as security guards and shop owners) act as police, the result may be false arrest or false imprisonment. If you have been falsly arrested, fill out this simple form for a FREE false arrest case evaluation.

Law enforcement officers are authorized to use deadly force only when it is reasonable and necessary to protect the officer or others from an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person. If nondeadly force reasonably appears to be sufficient to accomplish an arrest or otherwise accomplish the law enforcement purpose, deadly force is not necessary.

Agencies should develop use of force policies that address use of firearms and other weapons and particular use of force issues such as: firing at moving vehicles, verbal warnings, positional asphyxia, bar arm restraints, and the use of chemical agents.

Administrative Review of Shootings and Use of Deadly Force

An internal investigation and review should be conducted of all firearms discharges by officers, except those that occur in the regular course of training, and of any other use of deadly force. To the extent possible, the review should be conducted outside the officer's chain of command by internal affairs or other specialized unit.

The review should determine whether the firearms discharge or other use of deadly force: was within agency policy and reasonable and necessary, and, if not, whether and what discipline should issue; indicates a need for additional training or counseling, or any other remedial measure for the involved officer; and suggests the advisability of revising or reformulating agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.

To the extent possible, the review of use of force incidents and use of force reports should include an examination of the police tactics and precipitating events that led to the use of force, so that agencies can evaluate whether any revisions to training or practices are necessary.

Law enforcement agencies should analyze data on firearms discharges, in conjunction with other data, to detect potential patterns of at-risk conduct and take appropriate corrective actions.


Click To Talk To Us Online

Please complete the following questionnaire:

Name
Email
Phone Number
Best time to call
City/State
Date of Arrest
Circumstances of Arrest
How did you hear about Weitz & Luxenberg?
Additional Comments


see also:

Deadly Force False Arrest Lawyer: Police Policy on Use of Deadly Force
We protect against police brutality, false arrest & false imprisonment

Non-Deadly Force False Arrest Lawyer: Police Policy, Use of Non-Deadly Force, Brutality
We protect against police brutality, false arrest & false imprisonment

Use of Force False Arrest Lawyer: Police Policy on Use of Force
We protect against incorrect of use of force by your police department


Name Phone Email
Do you have a legal question? Ask us!   strictly confidential
Your Question

Click here
for a free case review



$53 million verdict — brake mechanic suffering from mesothelioma

$13.5 million verdict — one of the very first Vioxx trial cases

$15 million settlement — man wound up a paraplegic due to negligent hospital care

$37 million verdict — 2 asbestos lung cancer plaintiffs

$47 million verdict — boilermaker who died from mesothelioma

$75 million verdict — historic consolidated trial involving men who had worked at the Brooklyn Navy Yard in the 1940s and 1950s

$12.7 million verdict — iron worker who was injured due to unsafe working conditions

$64.65 million award — 4 asbestos plaintiffs

$17.5 million — consolidated trial of 5 mesothelioma victims

$25 million jury verdict — brake reliner

$5.8 million settlement — failure to perform timely C-Section

$30 million verdict — 7 former power-plant workers suffering from asbestos-related illnesses

$6 million settlement — pediatric malpractice case

$14 million consolidated verdict — 5 asbestos-related cancer suits: shipyards/powerhouses/construction

$8 million settlement — obstetrical malpractice resulted in neurological deficits

$3.5 million — 2 asbestos exposure cases

$600,000 settlement — motor vehicle negligence resulting in serious injury

$44 million verdict — 5 asbestos cases, including $11.6 million awarded to widow of sheet metal worker who died of mesothelioma

$1.6 million settlement — suicide after premature hospital discharge

$2.6 million settlement — ill-fitting prosthesis caused decubitus ulcers

$1.5 million settlement — construction worker fell off elevated train tracks

$750,000 settlement — defective construction equipment resulted in serious injury to worker



Ask a Free Question:
Were you injured?

check for your response [login]
For legal help anywhere in the U.S.
A nationally-recognized personal injury law firm, Weitz & Luxenberg is committed to helping clients win cases, get the compensation to which they’re entitled and continue with their lives. In just over 20 years, we’ve collected more than $1.3 billion for plaintiffs.