Alabama AG Opposes Immunity for Former Police Officer in Shooting Case
This week, the Alabama Attorney General’s Office took a stand against granting immunity to a former Decatur police officer involved in the fatal shooting of a man during a vehicle seizure dispute.
Attorney General Steve Marshall stated in a court summary that lower courts were justified in rejecting the former officer’s claims for immunity. This position aligns with reports from the Associated Press.
The ex-officer, Marquette, was seeking protection under Alabama’s “Stand Your Ground” law, which allows individuals to use lethal force if they believe they are in danger and are in a legally permitted space.
The incident in question occurred in 2023 outside Stephen Perkins’ residence in Decatur.
At around 2 a.m., Marquette and two other officers were aiding a tow truck driver attempting to recover Perkins’ vehicle. Body camera footage shows Perkins emerging from the house brandishing a gun. After identifying himself, Marquette fired 18 shots, resulting in Perkins’ death.
This incident prompted significant protests in Decatur.
A Morgan County judge had previously turned down Marquette’s immunity request in April, suggesting his attorney appeal to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. The appellate court identified serious issues with the previous court’s handling of Marquette’s claim that he felt threatened when a gun was pointed at him.
If Marquette’s appeal fails, he is slated to go to trial in September.
Moreover, the brief, presented by Alabama AG Kristi Wilkerson, noted inconsistencies among two officers who were present. One officer mentioned an investigation into misdemeanor threats from Perkins toward the tow truck driver earlier that night, while the other claimed he was unaware of such an investigation and thought they were only there to maintain order.
According to Alabama law, court orders are necessary for law enforcement agencies to seize vehicles.
State investigator Jamie King provided testimony that seemed to contradict the officers’ statements, indicating that even if Marquette felt threatened, the officers were not adequately positioned to ensure safety or investigate the threats effectively.
Marquette’s legal team argued that there isn’t a singular correct approach for officers to handle such situations.
In light of the conflicting testimonies, the AG’s office maintained that the court’s decision should be upheld, asserting that the judicial system is best equipped to evaluate the evidence’s credibility.
