Reasonableness-of-force-under-4th-Amendment

QUESTION PRESENTED Rather than submit to arrest, after violently assaulting his breast-feeding wife and defenseless 17-day-old daughter, a suspect fought with two police officers by brandishing a large fixed blade Ozark Trail knife, impaling the officer’s shield and continually bloviating vitriol at the officers that he would not return to prison or be taken alive. This bilious confrontation occurred over a twelve-minute time frame and subjected the officers to seven deadly force scenarios in which they were in imminent fear of death or serious bodily injury. The suspect, with knife in hand raised above his head in an attack posture, was commanded one last time to drop the knife and when he refused, both officers fired their service weapons fatally injuring the suspect. The questions presented are: 1. Viewing the facts from the officers’ perspective at the time of the incident, did they act reasonably, under the Fourth Amendment, when an officer in this situation would believe that the suspect posed a risk of serious harm to the officers or members of his family or the public? 2. Did the law clearly establish that this use of potentially deadly force was unlawful, when existing precedent did not address the use of force against a suspect fixated on committing suicide by cop from the onset and who repeatedly and explicitly threatened to kill the officers?