According to Nebraska v. Thompson, deadly force may NOT be used to prevent destruction of evidence.

According to Nebraska v. Thompson, deadly force may NOT be used to prevent destruction of evidence.

• A. Deadly force may NOT be used to prevent destruction of evidence
• B. Deadly force may be used if there is imminent danger
• C. Deadly force is required for preventing evidence destruction
• D. Deadly force is always allowed if the suspect resists

Answer: (A)

The main idea is that deadly force is limited to situations involving an imminent threat to life or serious bodily harm. Nebraska v. Thompson makes clear that preventing the destruction of evidence by itself does not create an immediate life-or-death danger that would justify using deadly force. In other words, you can’t justify deadly force simply to preserve or recover evidence; other, non-deadly means and lawful steps should be used unless there is an additional imminent threat to safety. If there is an actual imminent danger to the officer or others, deadly force may be justified, but not for the sole purpose of preventing evidence destruction. The other statements overstate or misstate the rule by suggesting deadly force is required, always allowed, or permissible merely because the suspect resists.

The main idea is that deadly force is limited to situations involving an imminent threat to life or serious bodily harm. Nebraska v. Thompson makes clear that preventing the destruction of evidence by itself does not create an immediate life-or-death danger that would justify using deadly force. In other words, you can’t justify deadly force simply to preserve or recover evidence; other, non-deadly means and lawful steps should be used unless there is an additional imminent threat to safety.

If there is an actual imminent danger to the officer or others, deadly force may be justified, but not for the sole purpose of preventing evidence destruction. The other statements overstate or misstate the rule by suggesting deadly force is required, always allowed, or permissible merely because the suspect resists.