Officer Charged With Murder In The Death Of Rayshard Brooks
[guest post by Dana]
The announcement was made this afternoon:
The Atlanta Police officer who shot and killed Rayshard Brooks at a Wendy’s parking lot last week was charged with felony murder, and the other officer on scene was charged with aggravated assault, Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard announced Wednesday.
The decision comes just five days after Brooks was shot twice in the back in Atlanta during an attempted arrest. Officer Garrett Rolfe, who shot at Brooks three times, faces 11 charges in all, and officer Devin Brosnan, who was also on scene, faces three charges.
After shooting Brooks, Rolfe said “I got him” and kicked him, and Brosnan then stood on Brooks’ shoulder, Howard said. The officers did not provide medical aid to Brooks for more than two minutes after he was shot, Howard said.
Their demeanor after the shooting “did not reflect any fear or danger of Mr. Brooks, but reflected other kinds of emotions,” Howard said.
…
Three of the counts against Rolfe are for aggravated assault related to a bullet he fired that hit an occupied vehicle nearby in the Wendy’s lot. Brosnan’s three charges include two counts of violations of oath of office.
Before his encounter with Brooks, Rolfe had already faced complaints against him:
Rolfe was reprimanded in a September 2016 use-of-force incident involving a firearm…No other details were provided.
He also has four citizen complaints on his record, none of which resulted in disciplinary action. Records also show that Rolfe, who was hired in 2013, was involved in five vehicular accidents. One resulted in an oral admonishment and another in a written reprimand, while the rest led to no disciplinary action.
Rolfe’s record also shows an additional use-of-firearms incident, in 2015, without note of any disciplinary action.
Law enforcement believes the shooting was justified:
But some law enforcement leaders said the shooting was justified and protected by Georgia law — which 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.”
Steven Gaynor, the president of the Cobb County Fraternal Order of Police, defended the shooting by saying Brooks posed a threat and had assaulted the officers as he was getting arrested.
“(Georgia law) specifically gives (the officer) the right based on the aggravated assaults and the threat (Brooks) poses to the public and to the officers there,” Gaynor said. “It specifically gives them by law the right to shoot him. (Brooks) chose to make those actions. He chose to to do what he did.”
There is conflicting opinion about the dangers of the Taser that Brooks took from one of the police officers:
The Taser is designed to be less lethal than a firearm, but it can be fatal in some circumstances.
Just two weeks ago… Howard charged several Atlanta Police officers with aggravated assault after they allegedly used a Taser — referred to in the arrest warrant as “a deadly weapon” — on two college students.
“The training we have had for over 20 years tells us if they take your baton or your Taser, it now becomes one step more that you have to use deadly force,” Gaynor said. “Because those can be used against you to incapacitate you and then take your weapon.”
The attorney for the Brooks family told CNN said earlier this week that a taser is not a deadly weapon.
In 2017, Reuters published a comprehensive look at Tasers as a cause or contributor in individual deaths.
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (25e0dc) — 6/17/2020 @ 3:42 pmTasers are a less deadly alternative to bullets. To what degree the officer was reasonable in his fear is for a jury to decide thusly.
Gryph (08c844) — 6/17/2020 @ 3:55 pmHis looks are against him. He looks like a skinhead.
I wonder the aggravating felony is.
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:13 pmThe media, as usual, gives us as much real information about this case as Peter Pan gives us about sailing ships.
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:15 pmThere’s a difference between being bad at your job and being guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The next DA will have to deal with the aftermath when he’s acquitted. Those cops were spinning their wheels for half and hour before Rayshard initiated the violence. A jury is not going to think they intended this outcome.
Dustin (d59cff) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:17 pmI thought it was the agg assault from shooting him.
I’ll try remember this comment if he has a full head of hair when this goes to trial, see if they fix that.
Dustin (d59cff) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:19 pmRayshard Brooks was on probation for four crimes – including cruelty to children – and faced going back to prison if charged with a DUI, when he was found asleep and intoxicated at Wendy’s drive-thru.
The charges to which Brooks pleaded guilty and for which he was still on probation dated back to August 2014.
He was convicted on four counts – False Imprisonment, Simple Battery/Family, Battery Simple and Felony Cruelty/Cruelty to Children.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8431801/Rayshard-Brooks-probation-faced-going-prison-charged-DUI.html
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:28 pm“Ain’t nothin’ he wouldn’t do
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:40 pmforto those kids.”Can the defense lawyers reference that other case where the government claims a taser is a deadly weapon as part of an affirmative defense.
Xmas (eafb47) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:40 pm9. I would think so, but IANAL
Gryph (08c844) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:44 pmThat’s got nothing to do with nothing. We already know he took a Taser, possibly fired it, and was running away. Whether the cop was justified to shoot him for it is the crux of the case.
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:46 pmWhat about the fact that they left him without medical care for two minutes after he went down, nk? Will that come into play?
Dana (25e0dc) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:50 pmWelcome to The Purge: Atlanta. Where all crime is legal, because cops can’t defend themselves and anyone who resists arrest will be allowed to go free.
Edoc118 (2faa81) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:54 pmYes, one way or another, Dana. It tends to show that the murder was exceptionally brutal and heinous. It’s one of the factors in aggravation for sentencing, and it could also be an enhancement for first degree murder. That’s why I’m curious about the “felony murder” label.
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:55 pmI would like to know if the officers ran his vehicle registration or ID before things got out of hand, and thus knew of his prior convictions.
Dana (25e0dc) — 6/17/2020 @ 4:56 pmBut just to note, the police union defense playbook these days is: “Never show remorse! You did the right thing! You had no choice!” So that apparent callousness may very well have been strategic. He was not going to do anything that might indicate that he felt he had messed up.
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:02 pmA Public Defender, overwhelmed with hundreds of cases on his plate, would win an acquittal. Georgia law is as clear as can be on the use of deadly force. Weighing the video with the criminal standard of doubt? Dude walks. He must.
Now, if the government truly believes his acts were criminal, where is the offer of recompense to the family? The DA came out in record time with the indictment in part to calm tensions. Well, where is the compensation for the family?
While I’m at it…what about the de-escalation? This seems like a textbook example of such. The new be-all, and-all talking point very well serves the cop. It also is a nice piece of evidence as to his state of mind prior to being attacked by the powerful drunk who we now know was avoiding (in his mind) a parole violation and a return to the joint.
Ed from SFV (f64387) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:04 pmut some law enforcement leaders said the shooting was justified and protected by Georgia law — which 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.”
That’s great but I don’t know how you can claim that when you shoot a guy in the back.
Hoi Polloi (dc4124) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:16 pmhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFEK0Sbq4o8
My policy is you don’t shoot a drowsy, belligerent drunk stumble-bumming away in the back– twice.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:28 pmLie
Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827) — 6/13/2020 @ 10:08 pm
The attorneys for the Brooks family has done so much lying that you have to wonder how it doesn’t trigger a problem with the bar.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:32 pm“A taser is considered a deadly weapon under Georgia law”
https://twitter.com/i/status/1273379778423189505
Ed from SFV (f64387) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:32 pmTwitter is a lawbook under Georgia law? For crying out loud!
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:35 pmIf I saw a guy put a taser to his head and threaten to end his life, I might think him a masochist for wanting to shock himself or conclude that it’s a cry for help or he’s not very smart.
Paul Montagu (d27749) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:39 pmIf the same guy had a .38 to his head with the same threat, I’d conclude that he really is serious about wanting to end his life.
I was a little surprised about Brosnan being charged, but the oath of office thing makes sense. He just stood there and didn’t render aid.
Ah hell, a trash bag or a cup of water are deadly weapons.
“Pretzels?” – GW Bush 😉
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:39 pmHoi Polloi (dc4124) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:16 pm
This is less than honest framing. Brooks didn’t seem to have trouble shooting the taser at the guy behind him. Would this be the same if Brooks had a gun? That’s would create some interesting loopholes.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:41 pm22,
It’s a video of the Atlanta D.A. saying just that…
Dana (25e0dc) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:41 pmI’d convict this dumbassed cop in a Noo Yawk minute; you don’t shoot belligerent drunks in the back— twice.
End of story.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:44 pmOh! Thank you, Dana. My apologies, Ed from SFV.
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:45 pmSo if a “belligerent drunk” reaches back and shoots at you, you can’t return fire? That would be some interesting case law.
The amount of dishonest framing being done on this case is a clear indication it was a good shoot. Oh, and word is Atlanta PD has walked off the job en masse.
Edoc118 (2faa81) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:52 pmEdoc118 (2faa81) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:52 pm
If the drunk trick shooter is black then yes, because the time has come and confederate generals.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/17/2020 @ 5:56 pmNo worries, nk.
An additional, UNCONFIRMED, bit on the blue flu, which has been acknowledged by APD who admit an unusual volume of cops who did not show up for their shifts, is that the Mayor has asked surrounding jurisdictions to help cover the void. The “word” is they have refused, except in the case of an officer needing assistance.
Ed from SFV (f64387) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:03 pmRumors are that Atlanta police officers are calling out sick or not answering radio calls and the like.
I have to wonder: with all of these Democratic mayors and governors knuckling under to the mob, are there going to be a surprising number of votes for President Trump and other Republican candidates from otherwise heavily Democratic cities?
The Dana in Kentucky (b859c6) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:09 pmPretty soon the operative orders to the police will be: do not fire unless fired upon, and do not use any force against a fleeing suspect.
The Dana in Kentucky (b859c6) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:11 pmRumors are that Atlanta police officers are calling out sick or not answering radio calls and the like.
Fire them! Decertify the union! They are violating their oath as peace officers. I miss Reagan.
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:14 pmWhat, APD think they’re ATCs? Or maybe just ex-LAPD?
W/”depression-level” unemployment numbers, fire them.
Now.
“World needs plenty of bartenders – two weeks, with pay!” Ellerby [Alec Baldwin] ‘The Departed’ 2006
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:15 pmAnother point to consider: everyone is focusing on whether or not it’s acceptable to shoot someone who has a taser. But the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled the officer’s perception at the time of the event are what matters, not how it looks in 20/20 hindsight. It’s entirely possibly the officer saw a violent, fleeing suspect point something pistol shaped at him, saw a flash and heard a pop, and thought it was a gun.
Edoc118 (2faa81) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:16 pm” do not use any force against a fleeing suspect.”
Oh gosh that would be terrible.
Davethulhu (3e20c2) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:20 pm@29. You don’t shoot sleepy, stumble-bumbling, belligerent drunks you’ve already searched in the back— twice w/a Glock.
Unless, of course, you’re Frank Drebin.
End of story.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:50 pmDCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 6:50 pm
What about belligerent drunks capable of fighting off two cops and stealing one of their weapons?
If this is such an obvious case why do so many people have to do the obvious, and dishonest, framing?
frosty (f27e97) — 6/17/2020 @ 7:05 pmI still don’t believe cops should have privileges or immunities other citizens don’t have. I still don’t believe Rayshard’s death was a bad shoot. I do believe that even if this was a bad shoot, the DA is way overcharging on this case most likely for political reasons.
Gryph (08c844) — 6/17/2020 @ 7:08 pmWas it only two shots? Did the bullet that hit the car go through Brooks or was it one that missed?
nk (1d9030) — 6/17/2020 @ 7:09 pm@39. There’s nothing ‘whadda-’bout’ about this.
A dumbassed cop did a dumbassed thing and is going to pay dearly for shooting and killing a drowsy, belligerent drunk twice in the back in front of several video sources amidst a fast-food drive-thru line full of hungry patrons.
_______
@40. Not only was it a bad shoot, it was a dumbassed stupid shoot.
End of story. Unless, of course, you’re Frank Drebin.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 8:23 pm@42 you can’t get whataboutism right either. Is Putin smiling?
frosty (f27e97) — 6/17/2020 @ 8:31 pm@43. Chill frosty; you’re swinging after the bell, Drebin.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/17/2020 @ 9:22 pmI’ll be honest, as I’ve learned more about this case I’ve become less confident about it.
I’m still 100% on the outcome sucks.
But whether or not the shooting was justified will, in my mind, depend on specifics I don’t know.
I do think a criminal investigation of the officer that shot him is fully warranted; The officer knew he had a taser and not a gun and Brooks was fleeing. I don’t think it’s a slam dunk case. If the jury finds them innocent I’ll accept it. But I think it’s worth investigating.
Time123 (52fb0e) — 6/18/2020 @ 4:56 amDid you know that tennis shoes have been held to be dangerous weapons? Here (Patterico even had a post about that one) and here, for a couple of cases.
nk (1d9030) — 6/18/2020 @ 5:08 amMr Thulhu wrote:
Yeah, it kind of would be. That would allow anyone who can run faster than the police free escape. Since most criminal suspects are young men, almost all male officers who are thirty or above are at a significant disadvantage, as are almost all female officers of any age.
More, even if the officer can catch the fleeing suspect, tackling him would be the use of force.
The Dana in Kentucky (b859c6) — 6/18/2020 @ 5:12 amSome guy from the Windy City wrote:
Maybe Frank Reagan, the fictitious Police Commissioner of New York City.
President Reagan was able to act because the PATCO strike was illegal, and even then he gave them three days to return to work.
Police officers are, of course, state and local employees, so the President has no authority to fire them or decertify their union. But yes, when Democratic politicians side with the criminals and the woke against the police, I can see why the police would feel the way they do. As it turns out, the rumors of their job action were greatly exaggerated, but I would absolutely support it if the entire f(ornicating) department stood down for a
The Dana in Kentucky (b859c6) — 6/18/2020 @ 5:19 amwhileday. Let the left know just what would happen without the police in a major city.Of ciourse, Philly’s “leadership” have surrendered to the mob.
The Dana in Kentucky (b859c6) — 6/18/2020 @ 5:22 amDana in KY,
There’s a difference between any force, and lethal force.
Police aren’t supposed to shoot people to prevent them running away. There are a lot of good reasons for that; fairness, putting reasonable expectations on police, and risk to bystanders. In this case it looks like they did.
Based on what I know now, if this ended up with the officer that fired being found guilty and the other innocent it would feel ‘fair’ to me.
Time123 (52fb0e) — 6/18/2020 @ 5:34 amso the President has no authority to fire them or decertify their union.
Are you sure? The National Labor Relations Board certifies unions, and the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of of 1968 determine who can own guns and ammunition nationwide state and local law notwithstanding. And that aside, why can only Presidents be like Ronald Reagan? Why can’t governors, mayors, and city councilmen?
nk (1d9030) — 6/18/2020 @ 5:39 amA lawyer near the lake wrote:
The NLRB is an independent agency, not one under the President’s control.
There you might have a point, as far as organizations, rather than individuals, owning firearms.
If only they were! But too many states have squish Democrats as Governors, and almost every major city is run by Democrats. If we had Governors, Mayors and City Councilmen who were even the merest shadow of President Reagan, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are today.
The Dana in Kentucky (b859c6) — 6/18/2020 @ 6:34 amYeah, I was way off base with the NLRB. Shouldn’t have mentioned it at all. It has no authority over state and local public employee unions. Tenth Amendment. It’s between them and their local governments. But the City of Atlanta or the State of Georgia could decertify them. Do it, Keisha!
nk (1d9030) — 6/18/2020 @ 6:57 am#17 above, I concur; and here is more support for that
argument from Sundance @ Conservative Treehouse.
IT’S A POLITICAL TRAP …
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/06/17/its-a-political-trap-outgoing-atlanta-da-sets-up-successor-for-problems-charges-police-officer-with-11-counts-including-felony-murder-in-shooting-death-of-rayshard-brooks/#more-194614
Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Paul Howard Jr., seems to
be following the same error filled playbook as Baltimore State’s Atorney Marlyn Mosby
in the Freddie Gray death prosecution, where all of the officer were acquitted, after
her incompetent press conference.
Also here is a stark example of BLM IRONY (Insanity?) – Who ya gonna call?
Palmdale, CA: VIDEO shows BLM protester freaks out when her baby boy stops breathing –
she then runs to police officer [LASD Deputy Cameron Kinsey] for help – who saves baby
https://www.theblaze.com/news/baby-breathing-nlm-police-palmdale
Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.
Gary L. Zerman (a1521c) — 6/18/2020 @ 7:02 amTime123 (52fb0e) — 6/18/2020 @ 5:34 am
This isn’t about running away any more than it’s about getting shot for sleeping in a car. The use of force rule in GA has been posted here before:
There isn’t a running away exception. You may think a guy who just fought off two cops and stole one of their weapons because he doesn’t want to go back to jail isn’t a threat to others but it’s reasonable to think otherwise.
The charging in this case is to appease the mob. Do you still think this is about equal treatment?
frosty (f27e97) — 6/18/2020 @ 7:20 amFreddie Gray. Philando Castille. Kelly Thomas. Daniel Shaver. Prosecutors throwing the case to appease the Blue Mob, and by Mob I mean as in Mafia. And Kelly Thomas and Daniel Shaver were not even black.
nk (1d9030) — 6/18/2020 @ 7:26 am#56 – Abuses abound. And when we tolerate lying – there is NO limit.
How about the Trayvon Martin case – where the MOB (BLM, Ben Crump, Reverend(?) Al, Eric Holder, Barack Obama, the Lame Stream Media, Hollywierd, and the entire Far Left) framed the innocent “White Hispanic” George Zimmerman – by inventing and presenting a fake witness – with the plan to divide America? See THE TRAYVON HOAX: Unmasking the witness Fraud that Divided America. https://www.thetrayvonhoax.com/ Similarly, was the attempt to frame Officer Darren Wilson in the Michael Brown case (Ferguson, MO) where false narrative “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!” was conjured by the deceitful group BLM.
Re other prosecution abuses, recall the bogus prosecution of Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK)- which was a Dem plot, as it gave them the 60th vote in senate to avoid cloture; also see Judge Kozinski’s dissent stating in pertinent part: “There is an epidemic of Brady violations abroad in the land. Only judges can put a stop to it.” – in U.S. v. Olsen, 737 F.3d 625 (9th Cir. 2013) http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2013/12/10/10-36063%20web.pdf , ; and USDC Judge Lynn Hughes statements – most particularly “Honesty comes hard to government.” [@ 809] – in U.S. v. Edwin P. Wilson, 289 F.Supp.2d 801 (USDC-SD,TX, 2003)https://www.leagle.com/decision/20031090289fsupp2d80111004
____________________
For those still having any doubt what government is capable of, I would also urge one to read U.S. v. Edwin P. Wilson, 289 F.Supp.2d 801, (USDC-SD, Texas, 2003), by district Judge Lynn Hughes, that reversed and vacated the 1983 conviction of Wilson (after he served 17-years, 10 in solitary), based on massive prosecutorial and other government agency misconduct, including perjured testimony, manufactured evidence and the
withholding of evidence. There Judge Hughes wrote in part starting at page 802:
“Twenty years ago the government tried a former central intelligence officer for exporting explosives to Libya. His defense was simple. He said he was still working for the Company. The government refused to disclose records of his continues association with the agency. When he presented witnesses to his contacts after the end of his formal employment, the government convinced the judge to admit an affidavit from a principal CIA official to the effect that there were, with one minor exception, none—zero. There were, in fact, over 80 contacts, including actions parallel to those in the charges.
“[P] … Because the government knowingly used false evidence against him and suppressed favorable evidence, his conviction will be vacated. [P] This opinion refers only to the part of the record that the government has reluctantly agreed may be made public. It does not attempt to recount even that limited range of data in its entirety; the governmental deceit mentioned here is illustrative—not exhaustive.
* * *
[at 809] “Honesty comes hard to the government. It describes its non-disclosure as ‘information allegedly concealed by the Briggs declaration.’ (Gov’t Answer at 64.) This is a semantic game—the information was not allegedly concealed; it was actively concealed…” [P] “The investigation is a dodge; there was no need to investigate: it knew the affidavit was false before it offered it. …”
* * *
“[at 811] “The government says that its use of the false affidavit was an innocent error. … In this case, however, the falsity comes from high public officials with access to voluminous records—not some high school dropout street-level drug dealer with a memory of one sale. … [P] … The evidence, now, shows that the hierarchies of both the Justice Department and CIA were as knowledgeable as was the individual talking to the judge and jury. … The court has identified about two dozen government lawyers who actively participated in the original non-disclosure to the defense, the false rebuttal testimony, and the refusal to correct it. …”
* * *
[at 815] ”In the course of American justice, one would have to work hard to conceive of a more fundamentally unfair process with a consequently unreliable result than the fabrication of false data by the government, under oath by a government official, presented knowingly by the prosecutor in the court room with the express approval of his superiors in Washington.”
* * *
[at 816] “This sort of behavior is among the reasons that the Constitution allows an accused to confront the witnesses against him. Instead of a witness who Wilson could examine before the jury, in his Texas trial Wilson was contradicted by a dishonest agency issued from a bunker in Virginia.”
Judge Hughes is to be commended for doing his duty here, defending the constitution, upholding the law, holding government to some degree of accountability, and attempting to right the extreme wrong done Mr. Wilson. Then again, this simply is his job and – he took an oath to defend the constitution. Judge Hughes though, goes rather light on the trial judge – Ross Sterling (barely mentioning him), who ignored Wilson’s objection to the Briggs affidavit, the Constitution-6th Amendment, wrongly favored government, wrongly allowed the Briggs’ affidavit and therefore failed in his gate-keeping function and helped cause the bogus conviction of Mr. Wilson. The same is true of the appellate circuit judges, Politz, Gee and Johnson, who unanimously affirmed Wilson’s conviction, as Judge Hughes does not even mention their names. U.S. v. Wilson, 732 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1984). There Judge Politz wrote in part at page 413:
“The affidavit [Briggs] was not inadmissible hearsay. … It was executed by the third highest official in the CIA whose duties include overall management, and it is attested to by the General Counsel of the CIA, the custodian seal of the CIA. [P] Wilson argues that introduction of the affidavit violated his right to confrontation of witnesses. The claim is not devoid of merit but it is not sufficient to render the affidavit inadmissible as a matter of law. Most exceptions to the hearsay rule necessarily implicate an interruption of the right of confrontation. That fact alone does not bar use of otherwise relevant, material evidence which satisfies sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness and reliability.
* * *.
“Appellant claims a Brady violation, suggesting that the government had information about association of certain people with the CIA which would have materially aided Wilson/s defense. Our review of the record, with particular emphasis on the classified filings, briefs and oral arguments, satisfies us beyond peradventure that no Brady violation occurred.”
Satisfies sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness and reliability? Wrong. But once again here is government – judges- siding with, favoring government, instead of upholding the constitution and protecting the rights of the People. . Satisfies us beyond peradventure that no Brady violation occurred? Wrong again.
It must be pointed out, several of the intimately involved federal officials in the Wilson case had their careers greatly enhanced by the conviction and “went on to become some of the most prominent men in legal circles today” including becoming federal judges. (See April 28, 2005 ABC Nightline expose “The Most Dangerous Man in American–Conviction of former CIA Agent Overturned on False Affidavit” at http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/print?id=708779.) Will anything happen to those involved federal officials who lied, deceived and manufactured evidence? Or will they have they government protect them? The matter provides a test case whether we have a Rule of Law? A meaningful Constitution.? Or tyranny?
___________________
The unconstitutional dastardly & despicable judicially created doctrine of Absolute Judicial Immunity – is a very big abuse of power and it has caused much of our problems.
There is no one left to blame – but the judges/judiciary.
Gary L. Zerman (a1521c) — 6/18/2020 @ 8:44 amLiberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.
Ted shackley (who would later pop up in iran contra) stanley sporkin, who would become a federal judge, crime does pay.
Narciso (7404b5) — 6/18/2020 @ 9:02 amWell, being drunk and belligerent, while on parole for multiple charges, including child endangerment, resisting arrest, wrestling with officers, stealing a weapon, running away, firing the weapon back at the pursuing police, is NOT the way to avoid getting shot by the police.
If I were on the jury, I’d rule it a justifiable homicide. But I don’t live in Georgia. Try something like that in Texas, and see what it gets you. A bullet in the back would be the least of your worries.
Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1) — 6/18/2020 @ 9:08 amGawain’s Ghost (b25cd1) — 6/18/2020 @ 9:08 am
I would have said the same about GA so we’ll see what happens when this goes to trial. The flood from CA -> TX is eroding my confidence in TX.
This situation has a lot more room for chaos though. Howard can continue lying about what happened and then negotiate a change of venue to Forsyth or one of the other nearby counties that don’t overlap Atlanta city limits.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/18/2020 @ 9:19 amReports are now coming in that one of the policeman was tasered by Brooks, and that the other received a concussion in the fight. Further, the tasers didn’t just have one shot in them, but 2 or three, and Brooks was trying to shoot the Policeman with the taser when he was shot.
Further, reports are that the Cop gave Brooks CPR and tried to save his life before the medics came. The Fulton County DA is under investigation for bribery and locked in a tough primary fight, hence his political press conference where he pandered to cop hating voters. Further, after claiming Taser were NOT a deadly weapon, someone dug a tape of the DA saying Tasers WERE deadly weapons from 2 weeks ago.
rcocean (2e1c02) — 6/19/2020 @ 7:08 amI watched the video. I don’t think it’s conclusive.
Brooks fired the taser.
He then continues running for 2-4 seconds before the officer shoots him twice in the back. During that time he and the officer both took several steps.
What I think is that an investigation is warranted.
I would understand and accept either dropping the charges and going to trial. I’ve got a list of questions that the video and reporting don’t answer. If they choose not to go to trial I think they need to do a great job explaining the decision.
Similar willingness to accept the Jury’s decision.
Some of my questions pertain to points you raised.
In GA how imminent does the threat to self or other’s have to be?
Legally what’s the precedent on if a taser is a dearly weapon? There’s been rhetoric about it recently but how have they been treating it legally?
Did the officer that shot Brooks know it was a taser at the time he pulled the trigger?
Why did they wait over 2 minutes to begin administering 1st aid? (Goes to intent)
I think the above is sufficient.
But I’ll add that I think the world would be a better place if historical outcomes made people confident that an internal police investigation would get to the bottom of this and result in justice. But that’s not the case. Given that unfortunate reality this is the least bad option.
Time123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 7:41 amTime123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 7:41 am
He then continues running for 2-4 seconds
I don’t see 4s in the video. I’d like the GBI to provide a complete timeline. The shorter that time interval is the closer you are to a self-defense reaction.
Why did they wait over 2 minutes to begin administering 1st aid? (Goes to intent)
This is starting to drift toward the dishonest framing again. It’s a stretch to say they intended to let him die. First, I’d still like to see a timeline from the GBI. Where is this two minutes statement coming from? I haven’t seen the video for this part of the event and if it’s coming from the DA it’s coming from someone who is already lying about other parts of the case. If it did take two minutes, that can seem like a long time when you’re watching the video but it’s not that long when you’re in the situation. If one of these was tased and the other injured that might have slowed the process down a little.
They aren’t doing an internal investigation. When it happened the Atlanta PD called the GBI to investigate. The least bad option would be to let that investigation proceed, take it to a grand jury, etc. The least bad option isn’t for the DA to give press conferences where he lies about the case for political gain.
The blantant lying, in this case, is disgusting. You’ve got a DA for a major American city lying about a case he’s trying. Not only are people not calling out the lies they are playing along.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/19/2020 @ 8:16 amThe indictment will fail and there will be another riot, a narrower bill of charges could probably fly
Narciso (7404b5) — 6/19/2020 @ 8:26 amThe part in bold is 100% correct IMO. If the investigator thinks a jury would find that the length makes self defense not applicable maybe they should go to trial, than it’s a fact finding decision for the jury.
I’m willing to accept that they didn’t wait two minutes. Or that they had other things they had to do at once and then did this. I think the question is worth getting a good answer on.
There is an earned lack of trust in the established process. That trust needs to be re-built.
Time123 (306531) — 6/19/2020 @ 9:05 amTime123 (306531) — 6/19/2020 @ 9:05 am
The APD engaged the GBI to investigate for that reason and that should be seen as an effort to rebuild trust in that process.
The DA is lying like a rug which is further eroding trust in the process.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/19/2020 @ 9:19 amI’ll be honest, I haven’t paid any attention to what the DA has been saying.
Time123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 9:23 amETA, my experience has been that once they’ve decided to charge the DA will often present a very slanted explanation of what happened in their public remarks. Not saying they should never be relied up, but they have a side in an adversarial process.
Time123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 9:27 amTime123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 9:23 am
You should because the DA and people like Abrams are fanning the flames to generate outrage that they can turn into political support and they don’t seem to care if this turns into more riots. They are also making arguments similar to what you’re making. It makes it hard to reconcile your position that you want a valid investigation and to rebuild trust when you’re repeating talking points from people doing the opposite.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/19/2020 @ 9:38 amAccusing me of ‘repeating talking points’ as if I’m just shilling for a team and not presenting what I actually think is rude. Is that the way you meant it?
I think this problem started because many people genuinely believe that when the state uses excessive force against black people the system does not provide justice for the victims and allows the perpetrators to continue in positions of power.
Time123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 10:00 amTime123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 10:00 am
I’m not trying to be rude or offend you but the line that Brooks was shot for falling asleep in his car is a talking point. It’s also something you’ve repeated. In fairness, you said passed out drunk in his car but it’s hard to see the difference. If you say that you thought that up independently I’ll apologize for being rude.
You’ve said you haven’t been listening to the DA. You should. The framing of this case is obvious and dishonest. Trying to rescue some sort of just cause for racial justice from the actions of the DA, and really anyone, trying to use the mob for political gain won’t work. Trying makes you look like part of the problem.
This is what confuses me about your position. I want to believe that you want justice and equality. But you don’t seem bothered that what the DA is doing here might just be the opposite of that.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/19/2020 @ 10:36 amYou seem convinced that Time123 has an agenda and is “part of the problem” when, to me, it sounds like he has a different opinion or different concerns.
DRJ (aede82) — 6/19/2020 @ 10:40 amI did say that. I also explained, a couple times, that I was saying the initial offense he committed was not a violent one, not that it was why he was shot. But honestly, i accept your apology. I don’t think you were trying to be rude or insulting and I appreciate your clarification.
Frosty, Here’s what I see, a man got shot in the back, twice. That should be investigated. There are a lot of reasons that while a tragedy, it might not be criminal. Because the the man was black and the shooter a police officer there’s a history of similar crimes not being investigated and addressed fairly. At this point in time I’m not alarmed at their deviation from standard process. I might change my mind on that as I learn more.
Time123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 11:35 amYeah, yeah, “deviation from standard procedure”. You go and shoot somebody in the back till he dies (two bullets hit him but at least one hit a car so how many were actually fired?) and see what your standard procedure looks like.
nk (1d9030) — 6/19/2020 @ 11:39 amTime123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 11:35 am
It should be investigated. But you can’t fix past injustice against one group by just swapping the groups around. There’s value in the rule of law and due process. You should be very alarmed by an Atlanta DA lying so blatantly and playing to the mob to get re-elected.
Did you know that Howard hasn’t convened a grand jury in this case, even though talking heads on TV have claimed he has, and has indicated that he may not be able to do so, “because of covid”, until after his re-election? Other state officials have said Howard should hand this off to the AG but he has refused. Did you know he’s currently under investigation himself? The APD involved the GBI immediately to avoid the charge of bias. Did you know the DA announced charges without consulting with the GBI and before they had finished the investigation?
What happens when these guys get acquitted because Howard overcharged or booted because he screwed up the investigation? I’m pretty sure that will chalked up as another example of historical inequity.
frosty (f27e97) — 6/19/2020 @ 12:30 pmWhat group do you feel is being treated unjustly here?
Agree 100%. I think the people who have been talking about how to fix the law, and how it’s implemented are on the right track.
You might be right. I think there’s a good chance than you are. People might also view it as a fair outcome because in this case there was a good faith effort to understand the facts and get justice. There are plenty of examples of similar killings that had fair and open investigations that didn’t result in outrage. See Radly Balko’s stuff for some examples, just be aware he’s been known to make mistakes.
Time123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 12:55 pmTime123 (cd2ff4) — 6/19/2020 @ 12:55 pm
There are, roughly speaking, two areas of injustice within the justice system in the recent past. The first is laws that explicitly codified racism, e.g. Jim Crowe laws. The second is situations where the laws or due process were simply ignored or abused to appease the mob, e.g. accidental suicides, charging consensual sex as rape, etc.
We’ve removed the explicitly codified laws so I’m not referring to those.
But we haven’t removed the more subtle second problem. We’ve traded a white DA, mob, and a black accused for a black DA, mob, and white accused. Where it used to be obvious that a black man was being charged with rape of a white woman simply because of the races involved we’ve now got a white perpetrator and black victim that is just as obvious an issue of race. If Brooks had been white and the cops black we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
I don’t care that this is a white guy getting overcharged, or that it’s a cop being investigated. I care that the DA is taking a massive dump on the justice system and people are pretending it’s being done in the name of justice. If the DA is lying how can it be a good faith effort to understand the facts and get justice?
frosty (f27e97) — 6/19/2020 @ 1:30 pm