Excessive Force Legal Standards

The counter argument could be that the officer's actions were not "objectively reasonable" under the circumstances, according to the Graham v. Connor standard. It may be argued that once it was clear the suspect wasn't armed, the continued use of force was unnecessary.

To prove the officer was not protecting the public, you could:
- Show that the threat was already neutralized (e.g., it was confirmed your defendant only carried a phone)
- Present witnesses' testimonies or video evidence
- Argue that the officer's actions created unnecessary risk or harm
Remember, each case is unique, so consult with a legal professional.

Under California law, you may refer to:
- California Civil Code *.*: This allows for a lawsuit if a person interferes by threats, intimidation, or coercion with someone's constitutional or statutory rights.
- * U.S.C. Section *: This federal law allows for civil action for deprivation of rights and could apply if the officer's actions violated your defendant's constitutional rights.
Consult a legal professional for advice.

Can you please provide more clarity on your question? Are you asking for more laws or strategies to prove excessive force or are you asking about a different topic?

To prove the public was at risk, you can:
- Present evidence of potential harm to bystanders due to the officer's actions.
- Highlight any reckless behavior from the officer.
- Show violation of department policy in handling the situation.
Remember, each case is unique. Please consult with a legal professional for advice.

Could you clarify how the actions of the bystanders could have potentially influenced the officer's actions, or are you suggesting their actions could be evidence of the officer's behavior?

If the bystanders were verbally objecting to the officer's actions, their testimonies or video footage could be valuable evidence. Were their objections related to the officer's use of force or to another aspect of the situation?

Could you please specify what aspect of the situation the bystanders were objecting to? Their testimonies could help establish context and specifics of the officer's behavior.

If bystanders felt unsafe, it could help show the officer's actions were excessive or created an unnecessary risk. Gather their testimonies, and any video evidence, to support your claim. Remember, consult with a legal professional for advice.

To prove the officer was not protecting the public, you could:
- Highlight that the suspect was clearly unarmed, which can be supported by video footage or eyewitness testimonies.
- Show that the officer's continued use of force, even after realizing the suspect was unarmed, was excessive and put the public at risk.
- Present any evidence of the public feeling threatened or unsafe due to the officer's actions.
Always consult with a legal professional for advice.

To argue that the continued use of force was unnecessary, you could:
- Emphasize that the suspect was clearly unarmed.
- Point out that the officer continued to use force despite this.
- Present any video evidence or eyewitness testimonies supporting your claim.
Consider consulting with a legal professional for specific advice.