What is required for an arrest using deadly force against an unarmed suspect according to Tennessee vs. Garner?

In the context of Tennessee vs. Garner, the use of deadly force against an unarmed suspect is justified when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. This case established that police officers may only use deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect if they have reasonable belief that the suspect presents a danger to the officer or to the public at large.

The distinction lies in the necessity of demonstrating an immediate threat; simply being unarmed does not preclude the possibility of the suspect posing a serious danger. This ruling emphasizes the necessity of assessing the totality of the circumstances surrounding the situation, including the suspect’s behavior and the context of their actions, which could indicate an imminent threat despite the lack of a weapon.

In contrast, other options do not align with the precedent set by this case. For instance, continuous flight alone or mere evidence of armed confrontation would not justify the use of deadly force without clear indicators of an immediate threat. Moreover, seeking authorization from higher authorities is not a relevant factor in the exigent circumstances that necessitate a quick response, which is often valid in life-threatening situations.