Thanks Fred Hall for ref to this clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxmiF_-4cOM&t=72
You are absolutely right about journalist saying she has "seen a video of the shooting aftermath" which convinces me a vid of some of the aftermath exists.
Not sure what it shows, other than "t
he police handcuffing her and searching her lifeless body."
IIRC, your original point about the vid was that it showed LE
cuffing & searching her, after she had been shot, and you thought that was
not necessary.
What is a lifeless body -
- someone absolutely positively, medically & legally dead, or
- someone on the ground whose volitional body movements are not detectable by casual observer, or perhaps even by LE?
Does this vid plus "lifeless" characterization means that
LEOs know she was dead, so C & S policy not app, cuffing & searching not necessary?
Is it poss that an arrestee/suspect
- who has been
shot at by LE may not be seriously injured or
poss not injured at all?
- an arrestee/suspect bleeding in a way observable to LEOs may be only superficially injured and may fake unconsciousness?
- injured in such a way may be biding time, waiting for a chance to use a concelaed weapon?
Some ppl who are critical of LE following C & S policy are doing so based upon benefit of 20/20 hindsight, to say LEOs and others were not poss'ly endangered?
Should statute or LE policy expect LEOs to make medical determinations about suspects/arrestees and selectively refrain from C & S -
to 'preserve arrestee dignity' when doing so may imperil the well being of LEOs, others in the area and even the arrestees themselves?*
BTW: Sometimes fam of the 'lifeless' in hosp. contends still living, even after 5+ med drs w appropriate neurological and other specialities concur on death, e.g., Jahi McMath.
These injured arrestees situations could be opposite side of the coin.
JM2cts.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
* About rationale of C & S policies:
"
People in and out of law enforcement, including some critics of the Police Department, say there are many reasons for the use of handcuffs in shooting situations, even after the bullets stop flying. It is meant to keep everyone — officers, civilians and the shot person himself — from further harm, in the same way a doctor might have to restrain a patient before administering medicine.
“It is standard procedure,” said Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman. “It is standard procedure to handcuff somebody, even after he’s shot.”
Indeed, the use of handcuffs is mandated by the Patrol Guide, the department’s policy manual.
“Handcuff prisoners with hands behind back,” the guide instructs in a section outlining the procedures for an arresting officer.
In another section, titled “Prisoners Requiring Medical/Psychiatric Treatment,” the guide states that an arresting officer should “rear cuff and place leg restraints on prisoner before transporting to hospital.”
Critics of the policy concede that handcuffing is acceptable to keep a shot person from doing further violence to himself or others, particularly if he may still be armed or in psychiatric distress. But several people said that police officials ought to re-examine the one-size-fits-all nature of the policy, particularly if the shot person is clearly incapacitated or dead from the bullets."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/nyregion/18cuffs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Nov 18, 2007 
