They're both a couple of old, dumb ****s.Quote:
Originally Posted by goingfor28
Printable View
They're both a couple of old, dumb ****s.Quote:
Originally Posted by goingfor28
Disagree with your assessment of the situation. I'm all for police reform, but this was too quick to judgment. I'd rather have left the G-FBI finish the investigation before making an arrest.Quote:
Originally Posted by metswon69
The investigation was still ongoing by the Georgia Bureau of Investigations and they were railroaded by the DA who is(in my opinion) using this as a political stunt. He is up for re-election and losing, so he is using this to try and help his re-election campaign.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
If its indeed true that Brooks was shot in the back from 18 feet away, its hard to justify necessary force. Its hard to justify that the policeman's life was in imminent danger. We'll find out as more details unfold but as I see it now, it looks like murder.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCSownsU
I'll just say this deserves repeating.Quote:
Originally Posted by metswon69
No one here has all the details.
In Georgia, a taser is considered a deadly weapon. Most police tasers have a range of about 15 feet. 15-18 feet is not a huge difference that one would notice at night during a situation like one those two police officers were in.
If someone is firing a taser at you in the state of Georgia, they are to be considered using deadly force(not sure how this applies to police officers at the current moment), so a police officer has a right to defend oneself against deadly force.
So, we can agree to disagree. As it stands with the limited details I have, I don't know if it's murder. Based on Georgia law, I'd say no. Based on morals, maybe a different story. But, we're talking about law, not morals.
Based on current Georgia law, I don't believe he will be convicted on a murder charge.
https://allongeorgia.com/georgia-sta...n-brooks-case/
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Big problem for Garrett Rolfe (the cop who shot Brooks twice) is the other officer at the scene (Devin Brosnan) is testifying for the prosecution. Its going to be hard to refute that testimony especially when Brooks was so far away and had his back turned when he was shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCSownsU
You're right. It might not meet the murder criteria but to me, its murder. More evidence needs to come to the surface and it will at trial.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCSownsU
I think the question will be, why not shoot low? Empty a clip in his legs and mobilize him.
We criticize you for your thought process. We challenge your values.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
You criticize all Dems. All Libs.
Challenge the individual and for what they stand. Challenge the man or woman, not the group, (unless of course that group has been proven and bases its existence on hatred.)
Trump- "My opponent sleepy Joe will take you all to the swamp I drained. I drained that swamp. I did it. That'w why covid is gone because I drained the swamp. Biden loves covid and swamps. The left will throw you into the covid swamp and I want to stop them"Quote:
Originally Posted by RCSownsU
Biden-"I was told there would be soup. Where's the soup? What? Oh. My opponent has orange hair. Orange comes from swamps and Covid. Ya know where I'm from, they say, 'you don't have orange and covid without the swamp to give it life'. I would have stopped covid and racism and homophobia and what's this one? Sexism? oh yeah, sexism. I would have stopped all of them. The right loves them. They want to give you isms and covid"
"Based on current Georgia law, I don't believe he will be convicted on a murder charge."
Based on current Georgia law they may be erecting a statue in his honor! Sorry RC Brooks was running away from the scene, he was shot in the back from 18 feet, what possible threat did he present? Eye witness claimed he fired taser in the air as he was fleeing.
I do agree we do not know all the facts. On the surface, optics are not good.
You're speaking like I said or didn't say he should be charged with murder.Quote:
Originally Posted by drt1010
All I said is
The investigation was not completed by the GBI, which is a fact.
That Georgia law indicates that a taser is a deadly weapon, which is a fact.
The DA is more likely than not using this as a political stunt. This is just an opinion based on real life events that happen time and time again with the political side of law enforcement.
Please just stop trying to make it like I'm on the side of the officer.
I just believe in innocent until proven guilty. We seem to have gotten further away from that as a society. Especially after the introduction of social media and opinion reporting.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
"To be clear, there is no agreement that our client is going to testify at any hearing," lawyer Amanda Clark Palmer told CNN's Chris Cuomo. There's no need for a plea deal, she said. "In my view, he doesn't need a deal. He shouldn't have been charged with a crime in the first place. ... He is not a state's witness. He is a witness."Quote:
Originally Posted by metswon69
She said her client shouldn't have been charged with aggravated assault because "an assault puts somebody in fear of immediately receiving a violent bodily injury. That wasn't Devin's intent."
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/17/us/ra...day/index.html
Agree, given the political climate and pressure. As I said the optics are not good, particularly at this point in time. Rolfe, was charged with felony murder, and Brosnan was charged with aggravated assault. Rolfe faces felony murder, five counts of aggravated assault, four counts of violation of oath of office and one count of criminal damage to property.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCSownsU
Brosnan also faces two counts of violation of oath of office.
My only point, what threat did he pose while fleeing? Imo the use of deadly force, while warranted under Georgia law given the circumstance, may have been unnecessary and excessive.
Georgia law allows a person to use deadly force "only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person."
Atlanta Police policy manual: an officer can use deadly force when "He or she reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury and when he or she reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of serious bodily injury to the officer or others."
From 2015 to 2020, police in Georgia have shot and killed 182 people, according to The Washington Post's Fatal Force tracker.
In that time, only one Georgia officer has been charged with murder. In 2016, a grand jury indicted DeKalb County police officer Robert Olsen for fatally shooting a naked and unarmed US Air Force veteran the year prior.
Olsen was acquitted of murder at his 2019 trial but convicted of aggravated assault, making a false statement and two counts of violation of oath.
https://codes.findlaw.com/ga/title-1...t-16-3-21.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...ings-database/
False equivalency to prop up Trump.
Imo there is a distinction to be made between what is technically legal and a more pragmatic resolution given the current climate surrounding policing. Again imo, Brooks death could have been avoided. Officers frisked him and had his ID, they knew where he lived and that he didn't have a weapon. What harm would have been done had they let him escape? Track him down at a later date, they had his address. Issue warrants ect. Very likely he would be sober less aggressive, possibly more cooperative and coherent. Deescalate the situ.
Yes there are many variables in play. He took the officers taser. He ran. He fired the taser over his shoulder in the direction of the officer. Was deadly force appropriate?