A dramatic and potentially volatile situation unfolded in the Kibón area of Montevideo on Friday night, when a police officer shot a 22-year-old man who had attempted to flee from a traffic stop. The ensuing chase culminated in a physical altercation in Villa Española, where the officer claimed the young man tried to steal his gun, prompting him to fire in self-defense. The victim suffered a serious abdominal wound and is currently receiving treatment at the Pasteur hospital.
As the investigation gets underway, headed by Homicide Prosecutor Mirta Morales, it has emerged that the case has been referred from Flagrancia due to the severity of the young man’s injuries. However, Morales has emphasized that no decision has been made regarding the officer’s situation at this time. The prosecutor is awaiting the results of various forensic analyses, witness statements, and video footage before proceeding further, which means that there will be no hearing in the immediate future.
The police officer, who is being represented by attorney Pablo Pisciottano, maintains that his actions were justified and in line with standard protocol. According to Pisciottano, the officer was merely acting in self-defense, as the young man’s behavior had posed a legitimate threat. “He was using force in response to the situation, which was clearly justified,” Pisciottano remarked. The attorney also revealed that the officer himself had sustained injuries during the altercation, including a head wound from being hit with his own helmet and neck injuries resulting from an attempted choking. The officer had managed to prevent the young man from taking his gun, but the struggle ultimately led to the discharge of his firearm.
Pisciottano underscored the idea that the officer had acted instinctively to protect himself, without intentionally aiming the gun or considering alternative courses of action. “He didn’t have any other choice,” the attorney pointed out, adding that the officer’s primary concern was preventing the young man from gaining control of the weapon. The attorney believes that the officer should not be subjected to undue scrutiny, as his actions were a necessary response to a threatening situation. “It’s simply part of his job,” Pisciottano said, implying that the officer’s response was a reasonable one under the circumstances.
The investigation is ongoing, with prosecutors carefully evaluating the evidence and witness testimony to determine the best course of action. As the case unfolds, it will be crucial to examine the complexities of the situation and the actions of all parties involved, in order to reach a fair and informed conclusion.
