Police Officer Persuasive Essay

1349 Words6 Pages
I want to thank Mr Koll, my partner Kevin, and the opposition side of Kara and Khala for giving us this opportunity to debate such a great topic in front you guys today.

First I want to clarify that this isn’t a black lives matter issue nor is this a blue lives matter issue. This is an issue that must not be seen on the screens of social media, but in the hands of the law. It is critical that the opposition realizes that the opinionated negative view of indicting an officer without a grand jury isn’t necessary, and it’s unjustful to the duties of a police officer. We stand here to debate on the behalf of the American Justice department, and police officers all over the world, who risk their lives day and night to protect you and myself.
…show more content…
State laws that authorize police use of force, which are backed up by Supreme Court precedent, give police significant latitude in using deadly force. In the 1989 case Graham v. Connor, the Supreme Court ruled that officers may use force to effect a lawful arrest or if they reasonably believe that the person represents a serious physical threat to the officer or others. This means that police may use force over any resistance to arrest and that if the resistance escalates, officers may escalate their force. The court also said that the number of circumstances must be judged with an understanding of the split-second nature of police…show more content…
So our opposition clearly wants to make the situation worse by ignorantly indicting police officers without a grand jury? This proposition means that potential defendants are not present during grand jury proceedings and neither are their lawyers. The prosecutor gives the jurors a "bill" of charges, and then presents evidence, including witnesses, in order to obtain an indictment. These proceedings are secret, but transcripts for the proceeding may be obtained after the fact. Prosecutors like grand juries because they function like a "test" trial and enable prosecutors to see how the evidence will be received by jurors. If the grand jury indicts a defendant based on the evidence presented, it returns a "true bill". If the grand jury decides not to indict, it returns a "no bill." However, even if a grand jury does not indict, the prosecutor can return to the same grand jury and present additional evidence, get a new grand jury, or even file criminal charges
Open Document