There was a controversial Officer-Involved-Shooting (OIS) that occurred on September 29, 2023 in Decatur, Alabama.
In the aftermath I wrote an article on this case as it was apparent that anti-police activists were taking a particular interest in this case and their rhetoric was suspect. For example Texas Civil Rights attorney and activist Lee Merritt descended on Decatur and encouraged a mob of protestors to “burn something down” (video).
Check out the initial article for background information.
This article will cover the important and disturbing updates.
Quick Recap
On September 29, 2023 a man with who works for a “repo” company claimed that he had an order to repossess a truck that was owned by Mr. Perkins. The man claimed while in the process of completing the task of repossessing the vehicle - that he was confronted by Mr. Perkins, who “flashed” a gun.
The man then left the scene and reported the incident to police officers.
Police officers then responded to Mr. Perkins residence and set up a “quasi perimeter” around the home as the “repo” worker again tried to load the truck.
It was at that point that Mr. Perkins exited the residence, armed with a handgun that was outfitted with a flashlight, pointed the gun at a police officer, and the officer responded with deadly force.
Mr. Perkins sustained a fatal injury.
Body Camera
In the last few days the police body camera footage has been released.
Here is what the footage depicts.
The “repo” worker was loading up Mr. Perkins truck in the driveway.
Officers were positioned near Mr. Perkins truck and across the street.
Mr. Perkins exited his residence and walked across his front lawn and approached the truck.
Mr. Perkins was armed with a handgun - with a mounted flashlight.
The flashlight was on and therefore provides a clear picture of where the gun was pointed.
At one point the gun was pointed directly at Officer Mac Bailey Marquette - who was standing near the rear of Mr. Perkins’ truck.
An officer yelled, “Hey! Hey! Police! Get on the ground!”
Less than a second later Officer Marquette fired multiple rounds at Mr. Perkins.
Issues
Police response.
Police officers were dispatched to a call where Mr. Perkins had allegedly “flashed” a gun at the repo guy. That is possibly a crime (Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon). For some reason police did not investigate that possible crime and instead focused on assisting the repo guy take the truck.
The officers stood by while the truck was hooked up and at no point did they contact or inform Mr. Perkins of what was going on.
Since Mr. Perkins already had a negative reaction to his vehicle being repossessed - how did the officers on scene expect him to react this time?
Mr. Perkins should have been contacted, detained, arrested, or otherwise secured while the repossession took place. It was predictable that Mr. Perkins would exit the home, armed, and again confront the repo guy and without any prior contact - Mr. Perkins may not have known that police officers were on scene.
I am not sure if there was a sergeant on scene - but this gross tactical error rests with the supervisor who allowed this obviously unsafe scenario to play out.
2. Time to comply.
There is a lot of criticism that police did not allow enough time for Mr. Perkins to follow the commands from the officer - before he was shot.
That is accurate. The time in between the verbal commands and the use of deadly force did not provide enough time for Mr. Perkins to comply. That is an objective fact.
But, the amount of time is not the relevant question The question is:
“Do police officers have to provide a warning and time to comply before using force/deadly force?”
The answer is, No.
Police officers should provide warnings before force is utilized “if feasible”.
For example, if an uncooperative suspect is just standing there, surrounded by police officers - they should provide a warning that a Taser (or other less lethal weapon system) will be deployed if he does not cooperate. If the incident is not an immediate life or death situation - then, of course, police should provide a warning and wait a reasonable amount of time - to allow the suspect to comply.
Charges
In early January 2024, Officer Marquette was indicted on murder charges by an Alabama grand jury.
Analysis
The applicable legal standard is “objective reasonableness” (Graham v. Connor).
Police officers are legally allowed to protect themselves and others from deadly threats in order to preserve life.
So, we are asking - is pointing a gun at someone considered a “deadly threat”?
The answer, of course, is yes. A gun pointed at another human should be viewed by all as an immediate deadly threat.
There is no law, policy, or training that would require a police officer to show restraint when a gun is pointed at them.
Police officers will (and should) respond to immediate deadly threats with deadly force.
When a gun is pointed at you the time for negotiation has passed - as your life may have only moments left to it.
Stephen Perkins
By all accounts Mr. Perkins was not a bad guy. Mr. Perkins was a father of two and worked for a pet food manufacturer. Aside from a DUI a decade ago he did not have a criminal history. It is likely that he did not know that police officers were outside of his home during the second repossession. That is the fault of police officers - not the fault of Mr. Perkins.
The police failed Mr. Perkins and for that his family should be granted an incredible civil settlement from the city.
The officers may have violated department policy, training, and common sense but Officer Marquette did not violate the law.
Mr. Perkins attorney has stated that the payments on his truck were up to date and that the repossession was improper. So, ask yourself - if you honestly thought that your vehicle was being illegally repossessed in the middle of the night - how would you respond?
Final Thoughts
Let’s assume that the on scene police officers did make a “tactical error” - in not securing the scene prior to allowing the truck to be repossessed. That fact does not eliminate the right of police officers to defend themselves against a deadly threat.
Pointing a gun at a person who is repossessing your car is crime.
It is important to remember that a committing a tactical error is not legally or morally equivalent to committing a violent felony.
Simply put - Officer Marquette was faced with an immediate deadly threat and he responded quickly with deadly force. Every law enforcement use of force training course in existence would classify this as a reasonable, legal, and “in policy” use of deadly force.
If you disagree - please cite the course, policy, or law that would instruct/require police officers to not stop the threat and instead - allow a suspect to point at gun at them or their partners for as long as they feel like.
We often discuss tactical errors. Every scene is a minefield of hazards as officers position themselves, while visually assessing and identifying the threats. We must also apply the Graham standard to the officers’ perspective as they process the dynamic.
4 mins ago
I agree with your assessment. In Alabama the charge of murder applies to intent as well as negligence. I believe that looking at the totality of the circumstances of what happened, the focus will be on officer negligence not intent when trying to convict. That single moment in time, he was 100% justified in using deadly force. As you said, there is no requirement to give a command and wait to see if they comply. However, it can be argued the officers were negligent in the entirety of the way the call was handled. If that is proven, then I do believe the murder charge will stick. It's definitely not a black and white open/shut case. It's complicated and requires a look at the law from the beginning to the end. I wish the officer all the best. He was put in a bad situation and forced to respond in a way that most officers will never have to. He had little experience to rely on and was most likely following the direction of senior officers