Attorney Dow Yoder issued the following statement about the police shooting in Flowood last week.
Von McDavid was shot four times in the evening hours of March 8, 2018, by a City of Flowood employee after approaching the exterior ‘walk-up’ window at a Kroger pharmacy in Rankin County.
Someone, possibly a Kroger employee, suspected that Von McDavid had attempted to unlawfully obtain prescribed medication shortly before the Kroger ‘walk-up’ pharmacy closed.
As Von McDavid attempted to leave the Kroger parking lot, a police officer exercised force in attempting to question him about the suspicion of the Kroger employee.
That force included the officer repeatedly shooting Von McDavid with a semi-automatic pistol, presumably issued by the Flowood Police Department.
 |
| McDavid |
Yoder continued, “MBI will report their opinions and most of the relevant facts to a Rankin County Grand Jury concerning whether the use of deadly force was justified by an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury from a vehicle allegedly used as a deadly weapon to assault the shooter: a Flowood patrol officer. The shooter will claim the use of deadly force was justified. Truthful facts may not support any justification. If Von Miller’s vehicle was stopped at the time of the shooting, why was deadly force reasonable?”
Is the use of deadly force in self defense reasonably justified when a government employee is chasing a suspect for questioning? Is it reasonable for police to repeatedly shoot someone, and claim self defense, without any probable cause for a felony arrest of the person they hope to question?
“Absolutely not,” said Yoder, a former Assistant District Attorney in Madison and Rankin Counties. “Von McDavid was not under arrest when he was reportedly shot 4 times for nothing more than attempted questioning. As an undisputed matter of law, Von McDavid is not guilty of unlawfully attempting to obtain prescribed medication,” said Yoder.
Yoder continued: “Unless the evidence proves beyond any doubt that Von McDavid intended to use a vehicle as a deadly weapon, rather than simply leaving, he should not be charged with assaulting a patrol officer as government justification for being repeatedly shot. Government employees do not have the right to shoot people because they wish to ask questions about what they do not personally know.”
Mr. McDavid will request a preliminary hearing as soon as possible, so a court reporter may record testimony of any witnesses claiming personal knowledge of any facts pertaining to the suspicion of the Kroger employee concerning Von McDavid.
Von McDavid is in stable, but critical condition in ICU at the University of Mississippi Medical Center.
40 comments:
He called him Von Miller....
Bless his heart, Dow has a client? After he got fired from the MadCo DA Office, and got trounced in the court of appeals race, I assumed he was handling public defender cases now.
"If Von Miller’s vehicle was stopped at the time of the shooting, why was deadly force reasonable?”
If a gun isn't firing but a perp's finger is still on the trigger, is it still considered a deadly weapon and threat to an officer?
And yeah, Von Miller.....that's some great lawyerin' right there.
If there is reasonable suspicion that someone has committed a crime, an officer has the right to conduct an investigatory stop to investigate. If during the course of the stop the suspect presents the officer with a threat of serious bodily harm or death, the officer has a right to use deadly force in self defense. Criminal defense/plaintiff's lawyers can't seem to understand this.
"Government employees do not have the right to shoot people because they wish to ask questions about what they do not personally know.”
Huh?
I will give that lawyer credit, he is starting at the bottom and trying to work his way up.
Von Miller is also Von McDavid. They all look alike and have an alias. The also all do drugs and run over cops when they feel threatened.
Isn't this the same thug that won a judgement against Tyrone Lewis and the HCSO a few years ago? Something to do with jail conditions at Raymond?
Flowood cop. Suspect in minor incident. 4 shots. If you're not asking questions, you're the problem.
I don't understand the several posts denigrating the attorney. I googled his name and read his bio and he has a pretty decent background seems to me. Losing a political race is not quite a black mark today. Happens every six months or so. What-up with the haters? One guy posting several times might have a burr under his saddle.
You people are so predictable. It’s all law and order so long as the deceased looks like this guy. Don’t lie to yourself about this. At least be honest. If this was some white kid with a frat swoop named Baskins y’all would be in a tizzy. I’ll wait on the facts before I make a judgment. But I’ll say this: using deadly force to thwart the escape of someone who allegedly attempted a nonviolent drug or property crime is illegal. Also, to say that having your hands on the wheel of a car when an officer is trying to interrogate you is tantamount to having your finger on a trigger, because they are both deadly weapons, is the most absurd argument I’ve heard in a long time.
Dow Yoder, known to use phrases like "burr under his saddle."
Interesting that some of you see this as being about a lawyer who messed up on a name ( or possibly a mistake by a typist). I'm sure none of you have misspoke and made a typographical error.
I just pity the perfectionists, but those of you who believe that, on the basis of a "suspicion" of what someone "intended to do" but " didn't do" a law officer can stop someone is frightening. Scarier still, you think a law officer can shoot someone who refuses to be questioned about what he was thinking.
You must be fans of the psychopaths that made up the Gestapo and KGB.
I always liked Dow. Don't get the negative comments.
I believe one of the news stations reported that the suspect (who is nor "deceased") attempted to hit the officer with his vehicle. Has that ben addressed?
So, suspect is questioned by cop about incident. Officer neither detains nor places suspect under arrest. Suspect doesn't want to cooperate and wants to leave, which is his lawful right. Now, which is more likely - officer places himself in front of vehicle to prevent departure or suspect drives out of his way to try to run over the cop he's trying to get away from?
Suspect's attempt to drive away characterized as deadly force so officer can shoot FOUR TIMES as he's stepping to the side.
quick-draw mcgraw needs to turn in his weapon and badge.
Dow is very smart and a good man.
If someone I love was shot four times, I would want some tough questions asked and answered.
No, the suspect does not have a right to leave while being detained. He has a right to not answer questions, but not the right to simply leave.
And this one is even more nuts, "But I’ll say this: using deadly force to thwart the escape of someone who allegedly attempted a nonviolent drug or property crime is illegal."
Shooting somebody who is attempting to run you over is 'thwarting an escape'? Anything that led up to that is irrelevant (nonviolent drug or property crime) and the point at which the 'escapee' turned the wheel in his direction deserved at least three to the head. You're nuts!
Nice group.
"Because I have not seen any evidence, other than Von in ICU on a ventilator, I do not know". A comment by Mr. Yoder on his facebook comments under this article that he posted on his own facebook. Bless his heart is correct.
I heard he tried to run over the cop with his vehicle. If so, that’s something to consider and might justify this shooting.
Who the hell names their kid Baskins? Hopefully not Mr. and Mrs. Robbins.
Godwin's law appears by 9:57 a.m. Ha!
Dow obviously knows the facts and the law. Dow for DA. That other guy too busy running for Congress to address this.
Negative comments about YODER are due to his opinionated, judgmental comments on many people's business and affairs where he has no knowledge or business inserting himself.
Anyone who thinks that this shouldn’t be fully investigated needs their head examined. Some shootings are justified, but some are not. The truth is what matters. I don’t know Yoder well, but I haven’t had any reason to think poorly of him. Not sure where all these people are coming from with the hate.
Youder needs to know that this garbage won’t fly in Rankin County!!!
"Who the hell names their kid Baskins? Hopefully not Mr. and Mrs. Robbins. "
You owe me a new keyboard :-)
Apparently not his first trip to the big house.
http://mugshots.com/US-Counties/Mississippi/Hinds-County-MS/Kenara-Mcdavid.96134635.html
1 yr spent in MDOC custody on a possession of a controlled substance charge & he's popped for a fraudulent script.....I suppose some will say he wasn't doing anything wrong
Great job FPD. Thank you for continuing to enforce the rule of law to Flowood.
I am not sure where this dude who got waxed is from, but I’m glad FPD got him. Next time maybe he will try to run his game is Jacktown instead.
As for Dow Yoder, I have no clue as to who his is or anything about him. But, his statements in this release sound as dumb as his name.
to mar 12 @ 9:51....... strap this one on tough guy. the cops do not 'enforce the rule of law'. the courts do that. thats what trials are for. seems you got a problem with that. maybe you should move to another country were there is no constiutuial right to trial. may i suggest iran, cuba, sub-Saharan africa , north korea or red china.
Dow Yoder has always dealt with his cases with honor and integrity as a Prosecutor. As a Defense Lawyer he has always been straightforward and fair. Maybe his client is not perfect but I think it is wrong to attack Yoder for doing his job as an advocate. He will get to the truth. I would have no problem hiring him as a Lawyer. I guess some people always want to search for the negative never even knowing all the facts.
As usual, many of you are trying to muddy the waters with unrelated comments.
First, you need " probable cause". If you think someone's opinion that someone might have been intending to commit a crime is sufficient, I'm stunned.
Then, some of you argue that if an officer stops to question you, that you have to submit until the officer decides. So how does that work? Until the officer gets you to give him the answers he wants to hear or he gets tired of harassing you? And, the officer gets to shoot you in the back if you just walk away?
Then some of you add actions you " heard" the guy might have done...like trying to run over you in a car.
Then we get the Godwin's Law throw away which if applied literally would mean that when people on the Internet actually wittingly or unwittingly defend tactics used in fascist regimes , those defenses can be dismissed. Let's ignore that free states limit police powers and that we all should be aware of those limits.
And, by 1:15 pm Someone evokes Godwin's Law without knowing what Godwin said to the white supremacist who tried to use it.
So, alleging a crime based on one person's notion of what another person's intent of someone on public property might be is all that's needed to detain? And, a police officer can detain you on speculation of intent indefinitely just by repeating the same questions over and over until the officer gets the answers he likes? If leave at any point, you can shot? And, if you leave in a car afterward , you can be shot even if you avoid hitting him if the officer imagines you might have wanted to hit him?
OK...so some of you aren't Nazis or racists, you just like governments that doesn't put the burden of proving guilt on the State but does put proving innocence on the individual. You think armed people hired by the government should have free reign to decide innocence or guilt and use deadly force in the process .
Mayberry would have been a better place if only Barney could have shot Otis, right?
Problem here is that none of you, to include Dow, know all of the facts in this case but seem to have an made a decision bast on your bias. Dow said he hasnt seen the officers' video, so how does he know? Have you seen it, or any other evidence? No? Then how do you know what happened?
"First, you need " probable cause". If you think someone's opinion that someone might have been intending to commit a crime is sufficient, I'm stunned."
9:49...prepare your ass to be stunned. If a law enforcement officer perceives that somebody is about to run him over in a vehicle, he doesn't need to convene a jury of six from the Wal-Mark garden center to agree. Whether you like it or not, the officer is then empowered to act accordingly and that includes reacting with lethal force. Take it up with the ACLU.
Why do some people think a police officer will always tell the truth? Police officers are some of the biggest liars in a courtroom. Lately there seems to be a lot of people trying to run over police officers, just as there seem to be a lot of people following too closely to the car in front of them, and the biggest one of all, touching the fog line on the highway.
That being said, there are also some very nice, upstanding, law-abiding police officers out there who puts their lives on the line every day to ensure our safety. These are the ones I salute.
all u num nuts wanna be criminal law republican experts..... 30 years veteran in the criminal trial arena here.....dow knows what hes doing... tune in for the truth in 6 o 8 months rather than your BS talk
,
How'd this end up?
Post a Comment