Police Shooting of Eddie Irizarry Raises Questions on Use of Force and Police Accountability

Philadelphia, PA - The recent release of surveillance footage capturing the fatal shooting of 27-year-old Eddie Irizarry by Philadelphia Police Officer Mark Dial has rekindled a public debate on police use-of-force protocols, departmental accountability, and systemic disparities in law enforcement.

The video, released on Tuesday by Shaka Johnson, the Irizarry family’s lawyer, is starkly at odds with the initial narrative provided by the Philadelphia Police Department. According to the video, Officer Dial shot and killed Irizarry within just five seconds of stepping out of his patrol car. This contradicts the initial police account, which stated that Irizarry “lunged” at the officers with a knife after fleeing a traffic stop.

The Legality and Historical Precedent

It is essential to analyze this case through the lens of legal frameworks and precedents to appreciate its full implications. In the landmark decision of Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), the U.S. Supreme Court held that law enforcement officers are prohibited from using deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect unless the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. The rapid succession of events leading to Irizarry's death raises questions about whether the officers had sufficient time to establish such probable cause.

Moreover, the doctrine of “qualified immunity” often shields police officers from civil lawsuits for actions taken in the line of duty, as outlined in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982). This doctrine has increasingly come under scrutiny, as it can limit the avenues of redress for families of victims like Irizarry. The Irizarry family's planned wrongful death lawsuit against Officer Dial and the City of Philadelphia will inevitably confront this legal barrier.

Another point of note is the role of police body cameras. Despite initial promises to the Irizarry family, the District Attorney’s Office rescinded an offer for the family to view body camera footage, citing concerns that it could compromise an ongoing criminal investigation. The withholding of body camera footage has become a contentious issue, as established in cases like Cineviz v. City of Arlington, No. 4:11-CV-00618-Y (N.D. Tex. June 17, 2013), which raised questions about the balance between law enforcement integrity and public accountability.

A Changing Narrative: A Matter of Public Trust

Lawyer Fortunato Perri, who represents the Fraternal Order of Police, emphasized the tragic nature of the event, while Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw and Mayor Jim Kenney have scheduled a news conference to discuss the case. However, the changing narrative from the police department has further muddied the waters. Initial statements from the police have turned out to be in conflict with the video evidence, undermining public trust. This misalignment invokes memories of cases like Floyd v. City of New York, 959 F. Supp. 2d 540 (S.D.N.Y. 2013), where a court found that the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk policy was applied in a racially discriminatory manner, exacerbating tensions between the community and law enforcement.

The incident began when two uniformed officers from the 24th Police District reported seeing Irizarry "driving erratically" in North Philadelphia. However, the video shows Irizarry parked when officers approached him. This divergence in accounts brings forth critical questions on the reasonableness of the use of force. As with the infamous shooting of Philando Castile, where an officer shot Castile during a traffic stop despite him informing the officer he was legally carrying a firearm, the lapse between officer commands and use of deadly force is drawing scrutiny.

Psychological Factors in Policing

It is worth noting that the officers could not have known that Irizarry had struggled with schizophrenia, a detail released by the family’s legal counsel. Cases like San Francisco v. Sheehan, 135 S. Ct. 1765 (2015), have raised questions about whether police should be trained to recognize and de-escalate situations involving individuals with mental health conditions. Irizarry's family highlighted that he was "introverted and kind" and had never had a negative encounter with the police, suggesting that more nuanced tactics might have prevented this tragic outcome.

Law enforcement's responsibilities are undeniably fraught with uncertainties and dangers, and the role of a split-second decision is often cited in legal defenses of police action, as seen in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). However, when a life is lost within five seconds of an encounter, the rapidity and finality of such decisions must be subjected to the most rigorous scrutiny. As we await further developments in the Irizarry case, it serves as yet another touchstone for ongoing dialogues surrounding police use-of-force, accountability, and the role of mental health in law enforcement encounters.


  1. Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985).
  2. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982).
  3. Cineviz v. City of Arlington, No. 4:11-CV-00618-Y (N.D. Tex. June 17, 2013).
  4. Floyd v. City of New York, 959 F. Supp. 2d 540 (S.D.N.Y. 2013).
  5. San Francisco v. Sheehan, 135 S. Ct. 1765 (2015).
  6. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989).


KaplanMarx is a Philadelphia based law firm focusing on personal injury and accident cases. We pride ourselves in our community roots and help injury victims and their families every day to recover.



Get Your Free Consultation


This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.