ADD TO CALENDARLOGIN TO ADD TO YOUR SCHEDULE

The objective reasonableness standard embodied in Graham v Connor has been the clear legal standard for evaluating all use of force encounters since 1989. This constitutional standard requires courts to view a use of force incident through the eyes of an objectively reasonable police officer without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. This vision gets a bit blurry when officers find themselves charged in criminal courts. Some courts judge the actions of an officer through the same lens they view the actions of an average citizen. Rather than inquiring what a reasonable police officer would do in a given set of circumstances, some courts would rather ask what an untrained person would do. This disparity has created unpredictable results for officers. Has this inconsistent application of the law denied officers equal protection of the law guaranteed by the 14th Amendment?

PRESENTER: Mary Mara, Attorney Advisor, FLETC, Sam Lochridge, Attorney Advisor (Instructor), FLETC

---

BACK
HOME