Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of Rifle Police Officer Who Fatally Shot Suicidal Suspect
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has made a critical decision in favor of law enforcement by ruling that a Rifle police officer did not violate the Constitution when he fatally shot a suicidal suspect in the back. Even though the man never pointed a weapon at anyone but himself.
The three-judge panel found that Officer Dewey Ryan acted within his rights when he shot Allan George, who had threatened to kill himself and resisted arrest by pointing a gun at himself and jogging away from the officers.
COURT: Once George began running toward downtown with a loaded gun in his pocket, he "clearly abandoned" any intention of dying by suicide.
Despite previous attempts by a trial judge to dismiss the lawsuit against Officer Ryan, the city of Rifle, and the city's former police chief, the 10th Circuit panel strongly disagreed.
Senior Judge Mary Beck Briscoe stated in the court's ruling that George's actions "clearly abandoned" any intention of dying by suicide and instead showed an intention to evade arrest. It is important to note that the officers were aware of George's recent possession of child pornography and his desire to not return to jail.
Bystander video captures Allan George swinging his arms as if preparing to jump off a bridge as Officer Dewey Ryan points his gun on Aug. 5, 2019.
CLICK HERE TO WATCH GRAPHIC VIDEO OF STAND OFF
The incident, which took place on August 5th, 2019, was captured on video and showed George pulling out a gun and pointing it at himself while standing by the guardrail on a bridge. Despite multiple requests from the officers to put the gun down, George refused and instead stated that he would rather die than go to jail. He then put the gun in his pocket and began jogging away from the officers with his gun still in his possession.
In a heated exchange during the court's oral arguments, the judges acknowledged that George's refusal to comply with the officers' warnings added to the danger of the situation.
Attorney David Lane, representing the George family, argued that there was no guarantee of immediate danger, while Senior Judge Paul J. Kelly Jr. questioned whether the officers should have given George the first shot.
During oral arguments before the 10th Circuit, the appellate judges suggested Sweeney looked too narrowly at the safety risk George posed. "How do we factor in the refusal to heed the warnings?" asked Judge Veronica S. Rossman.
In the end, the court made its decision based on the facts of the case, ruling that Officer Ryan used appropriate force under the circumstances. Judge Briscoe argued that the video evidence "blatantly contradicted" the trial judge's views and deemed George a threat to both the officers and the general public.
READ MORE:
$1.5 MILLION IN SANCTIONS WIPED AWAY BY 10TH CIRCUIT IN DENVER
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CASE COULD HAVE FAR REACHING IMPLICATIONS
The court's ruling also brings into question the liability of the city and the former police chief, as the panel concluded that there was no constitutional violation and therefore no basis for holding them accountable. The defendants' attorneys declined to comment on the decision.
Attorney David Lane criticized the court's ruling as "wild speculation" about what George might have done. He believes that this ruling is yet another example of the erosion of civil rights enforcement in our federal courts.