The Officer, Jing-Yi Chang Found Not Guilty for Manslaughter in His Accidentally Shooting the Thief on His Getaway Motorcycle

This is a case, where the officer had the JUST cause to fire at the suspect! From the Front Page Sections, translated…

The Taipei City Police Department’s officer from Wanhua Substation’s Han-Zhong Street Substation, Jing-Yi Chang was helping with the chase of the burglar, Li, as Li drove the getaway car into the busy streets of Ximen, he’d opened fire, one bullet passed through the car window, and hit Li in the stomach, Li had died. Officer Chang was indicted on manslaughter charges, the Taipei District Courts believed, that Chang had an emergent reason for opening fire, that he’d not broken any rules of gun usage, gave him an innocent verdict. But the D.A. can appeal.

After the incident, Officer Chang was assigned elsewhere, he’s currently a backup officer. As he’d gone to court, to hear the verdict, “that rock had been put down gently, the verdict gave the law enforcement justice”, hoped, that in the future, there would be no more officers who’d feared using their guns, that’s caused more serious conditions again, “when the weapons are needed, we should, use them.”

The burglar, Li has three children, and as he was gunned down by Chang, his youngest was just born, the mother and son were staying at the afterbirth care center. Officer Chang had paid the families $800,000N.T. for their losses, but he’d stressed, “I wasn’t trying to pay to get a not guilty verdict”, but he’d said, that “in my twenty-three years on the police force, that was, the very first time I’d, used a gun on duty”, although a man had died, but, his conscience was clear.

On the eve of Chinese Valentine’s Day on August 13^th, 2013, Chang went to Ximen to sort out the roadside stands, the suspect, Lil, was chased because he’d attempted to steal a motorcycle, he’d ridden his mo-ped above the speed limit from Zhonghe District, Hsinbei City, to the district where Chang was patrolling, he’d rammed the pedestrians’ pass in Ximen, and Chang hollered him to stop running, Li refused, Chang fired his gun at the tires, a bullet passed through the windshield, and entered into Li’s abdomen, caused him to die.

In the court sessions, Chang claimed, that he’d, aimed at the tires, and, the reconstruction of the shooting at the scene showed, that the first bullet that Chang fired, was about five meters away from Li, the second shot, about one to two meters, but, the second shot, because of the car moving, the path of the bullet was altered, and, it’d, entered into the windshield from the front.

The verdict pointed out, that Li had, resisted arrest, he’s a criminal in action, and drove too fast down the sidewalks, and he’d caused imminent dangers to the pedestrians already, as Chang hollered for him to stop running, Li didn’t comply, didn’t turn off the ignitions, instead, he’d, sped off, and rammed into the cars that blocked his pass, and, there wasn’t any other fitting measures, for Officer Chang to take, but to shoot.

The Collectivist Courts believed, that from Chang’s situation, and his mindset during which he’d pulled the gun out, he’d not aimed at the driver’s seat, instead the tires, he’d already, reduced the dangers of firing toward Li as well as the pedestrians, that he’d not broken any rules for gun usage, that he’d not gone above what was needed to be done, nor did he break any rules in using his weapon.

So, this burglar deserved it, and, he’d died, because of the accidental bullet, the officer WAS shooting at the tires, but, because the suspect drove too fast, it’d, changed the trajectory of how the bullet had, entered into the car, and, because the forensics showed NO evidence that the officer was aiming at the suspect, that, was why he received a not-guilty verdict.