Officers avoid liability in ‘suicide by cop’
Could the mere turning of a car key tip the scales in favor of the use of deadly force in a confrontation between Florida police officers and an armed, suicidal man?
That would appear to be the case in a civil rights decision issued by the 11th Circuit last week.
John Garczynski was shot to death in the early morning hours of March 10, 2005, by members of the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office and the Boca Raton Police Department.
At the moment bullets began to fly, there appears to be little doubt that officers were justified in using deadly force because, by all accounts, Garczynski had pulled a gun away from his temple and pointed it in their direction.
But when one steps back from that moment, questions begin to arise as to whether officers were too aggressive in their overall handling of the situation.
Earlier in the evening, Garczynski had given his estranged wife, Leigh, his last will and testament and an obituary listing his date of death as March 9, 2005. Garczynski told Leigh that he was armed and planned to kill himself.
Leigh contacted police who located Garczynski by his car in a parking lot.
Garczynski was apparently unaware that police had found him.
At the same time that police secured the area, Leigh tried to reason with him over a cellphone.
The situation seemed well in hand until an officer with Leigh instructed her to tell Garczynski to enter his car and start his engine, apparently so he could stay warm.
The officers keeping an eye on Garczynski feared a running gun battle and had already decided that the suicidal man would not be allowed to leave the parking lot.
The sound of Garczynski starting his engine was the trigger that sent them into action.
The officers approached the vehicle with guns drawn and identified themselves. One officer smashed out windows in order to get a clearer view of the interior of the vehicle.
Startled by the sudden appearance of police, Garczynski reached for his gun and proceeded on the course of threatening behavior than ultimately caused the officers to open fire.
In the ensuing §1983 action, the main hope of Garczynski’s estate was to show that the police acted unreasonably in moving aggressively to end the situation when to all appearances Garczynski was sitting peacefully in his car, talking to his wife on a cellphone.
But the 11th Circuit said that the “sole inquiry is whether the officer’s actions, as taken, were objectively reasonable under all the circumstances.”
One might question whether police should have stood by until Garczynski took an action that was more overtly aggressive than simply starting his car.
But the court came down squarely on the side of law enforcement on this issue.
“Even if these officers mistakenly believed that Garczynski was about to drive away, it was reasonable for them to attempt to contain the situation in light of the information they possessed,” the court explained. “The officers were not required to wait and see if Garczynski remained stationary, or rely on … stop sticks and surrounding police officers to deter him should he suddenly become mobile. Given that Garczynski had a gun and was not clearly visible, the officers acted reasonably in immediately approaching the vehicle with their weapons drawn and shattering the vehicle’s side windows to obtain a better view of him.” (Garczynski v. Bradshaw)
— Pat Murphy
patrick.murphy@lawyersusaonline.com
Get the latest key cases from the federal and state courts on Twitter!
