Atlanta police release bodycam video leading up to death of Rayshard Brooks

[Dashinka 24,513]

2 minutes ago, laylalex said:

All I was saying was repeating what the DA has said. Of course it is now up to the state to prove that he knew it. We can't look into his brain of course, but there may be things that show that he should have known it was discharged. I am not familiar with what happens, but do police officers have to mark down every time they discharge a Taser? Something like that could show he knew. 

 

Again I said I don't really know, and I think there is a lot of grey area here. My first thoughts when I heard this news were that the shooting was justified and the cop should not have been fired. But now I'm not sure. I'm open to hearing what is said on both sides.

Yes, a DA that said many untruthful things yesterday, and is himself under investigation for sexual harassment and corruption, and just came in second in a three way run-off election.  On top of it, the GBI investigation is not even completed yet, but this DA was ready to charge.  Additionally, this DA recently described a Taser as a deadly weapon, and one of the officers was actually hit by one shot from the Taser. Mr. Brooks was clearly driving while intoxicated, and if these police officers did not attempt to detain him, he could have killed someone else, and these LEOs would have been hammered for that.  It really appears that the DA overcharged here for potentially political reasons, and who knows what will happen if and when these LEOs get off.  I do know that I am not surprised that many Atlanta police officers are refusing to work now, if they feel they will not get fair treatment from an incident, I would not feel comfortable coming to work.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

29 minutes ago, laylalex said:

I completely agree with you on all these points. I have read that the taser had been used twice already and so could not be used again in a way that would make the cop fear for his life at that distance (since it no longer could be fired and was just an inert object), and the cop would have known this. It's like someone stealing a water gun off of you and then pointing it at you and firing it -- you know it isn't a deadly weapon, so you don't get to use deadly force to protect yourself.

 

Murder I'm not sure about and I don't pretend to be a lawyer. (I'm only a lawyer's kid!) But they had this guy's details, they had his car, he had a weapon that they knew was useless by that point. Why shoot him? I hope more information will come out. I don't pretend to know enough right now to say this was right or wrong, and I think it's a more grey area than with George Floyd. I put my faith in the process, since that's the best we can do right now.

 Zero gray area and Absolutely 100% justified and the GBI will reach that finding.  2 weeks ago the same DA charged 2 cops, for using a Taser,  because in his words " they used a deadly weapon" There is no gray area. He fired a Taser  at a cops head after assaulting him. Regardless if the officer has counted times fired or not, the taser can also be used in a contact stun mode without firing the darts. So you got a drunk, violent felon running from the area who shoots at a police officers head and is trying to flee into the public with a dangerous weapon. what would have happened had the Taser incapacitated the policeman and his gun was taken ?

 

 dont be swayed by all the  misrepresentations you see in the news.

 

Do you realize the DA just charged someone before the investigation is even over?  Unprecedented. The GBI had no idea what was going on and released a statement saying the investigation was not over. 

 

Seems lynching has come full circle

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

11 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Yes, a DA that said many untruthful things yesterday, and is himself under investigation for sexual harassment and corruption, and just came in second in a three way run-off election.  On top of it, the GBI investigation is not even completed yet, but this DA was ready to charge.  Additionally, this DA recently described a Taser as a deadly weapon, and one of the officers was actually hit by one shot from the Taser. Mr. Brooks was clearly driving while intoxicated, and if these police officers did not attempt to detain him, he could have killed someone else, and these LEOs would have been hammered for that.  It really appears that the DA overcharged here for potentially political reasons, and who knows what will happen if and when these LEOs get off.  I do know that I am not surprised that many Atlanta police officers are refusing to work now, if they feel they will not get fair treatment from an incident, I would not feel comfortable coming to work.

I have talked to several police officers both white and black and all have agreed it was 100% justified.  One of the officers told me the reason the Chief in Atlanta resigned is because the Mayor ordered her to fire the officers and she refused, because she knew it was justified. 

If the guy shot had been white, the cops would already be back on the job. This is racism at is finest 

[Dashinka 24,513]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

I have talked to several police officers both white and black and all have agreed it was 100% justified.  One of the officers told me the reason the Chief in Atlanta resigned is because the Mayor ordered her to fire the officers and she refused, because she knew it was justified. 

If the guy shot had been white, the cops would already be back on the job. This is racism at is finest 

The Atlanta mayor deserves the bed she made, unfortunately the people of Atlanta will suffer.

[Dashinka 24,513]

36 minutes ago, laylalex said:

All I was saying was repeating what the DA has said. Of course it is now up to the state to prove that he knew it. We can't look into his brain of course, but there may be things that show that he should have known it was discharged. I am not familiar with what happens, but do police officers have to mark down every time they discharge a Taser? Something like that could show he knew. 

 

Again I said I don't really know, and I think there is a lot of grey area here. My first thoughts when I heard this news were that the shooting was justified and the cop should not have been fired. But now I'm not sure. I'm open to hearing what is said on both sides.

I thought this was interesting.  I wonder what would happen if the case get thrown out?

 

American Bar Association rules prohibit prosecutors from making pretrial statements that could influence public perception and prejudice an accused's ability to get a fair trial. Howard violated this rule by making a lengthy presentation of evidence that supported his position and ignored key facts that did not. Judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys typically refer to Howard's impropriety as trying the case in the press.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/06/18/brooks-floyd-deaths-police-misconduct-not-always-racist-column/3206372001/

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, laylalex said:

All I was saying was repeating what the DA has said. Of course it is now up to the state to prove that he knew it. We can't look into his brain of course, but there may be things that show that he should have known it was discharged. I am not familiar with what happens, but do police officers have to mark down every time they discharge a Taser? Something like that could show he knew. 

 

Again I said I don't really know, and I think there is a lot of grey area here. My first thoughts when I heard this news were that the shooting was justified and the cop should not have been fired. But now I'm not sure. I'm open to hearing what is said on both sides.

The DA who is facing charges of embezzling about $195,000 of city money?  And outright lied in his public statements to try and gain favor?  Not sure I'd put much faith in his words.

 

I DO think it was unnecessary to shoot this guy.  They could have just chased him down.  However, the guy DID start the violence after things had been going so well up until that point. 

Edited June 18, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

 

11 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

The DA who is facing charges of embezzling about $195,000 of city money?  And outright lied in his public statements to try and gain favor?  Not sure I'd put much faith in his words.

 

I DO think it was unnecessary to shoot this guy.  They could have just chased him down.  However, the guy DID start the violence after things had been going so well up until that point. 

I don't think anything here could've or should've been different. Regardless of the skin color of the person, if they point any kind of weapon at a cop, they deserve what's coming next.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

6 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

 

I don't think anything here could've or should've been different. Regardless of the skin color of the person, if they point any kind of weapon at a cop, they deserve what's coming next.

I agree with this, but "lowest necessary force" should be the goal.

[laylalex 7,285]

 

23 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

The DA who is facing charges of embezzling about $195,000 of city money?  And outright lied in his public statements to try and gain favor?  Not sure I'd put much faith in his words.

 

I DO think it was unnecessary to shoot this guy.  They could have just chased him down.  However, the guy DID start the violence after things had been going so well up until that point. 

As I said before and I will say again, I am open to hearing more on this. I tended to think this was justified before, but I am not as convinced as I was earlier. I want to know more. So please don't assume I am with the DA on this, I just am open to hearing what is out there.

 

However I also think that you can't say definitively that because someone lied or embezzled in another matter means that he did on this occasion. It just goes generally to his character. So I want to say thank you to everyone here for bringing up additional points because I do appreciate them.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

10 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

I agree with this, but "lowest necessary force" should be the goal.

Indeed. Any real "use of force" model emphasizes de-escalation tactics. There are times where we see police actually escalate conflicts when they should be minimizing them. Those long should've been a target by police forces for change. Would've been entirely irrelevant here. The police were very cordial, and clearly were not looking for a fight. RB was cooperative. Everything looked routine until RB made that crucial choice when getting cuffed to start fighting them. From there, it cascaded into other bad choices by him culminating in him pointing a weapon at police and paying the price. No use of force model, or de-escalation would've been effective. RB's choices led to a destined outcome.

 

I want to say, there's some minutiae I think worth also looking at, like an officer's clumsy taser placement I've debated elsewhere, I just don't bother in most discussions in order to keep the conversation simple and things like this can easily be fodder by certain fault-finding people to justify RB's actions which are indefensible and take away from the fact that he was entirely the cause of his own death. Personal responsibility goes a long way in the big picture of personal choices, and it bothers me to no end that there's a good swath of bad people encouraging blacks to make awful self-endangering choices to further their political agenda.

Edited June 18, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[OriZ 3,157]

21 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Atlanta Police walk out following murder charge against officer who shot Rayshard Brooks

 

https://decaturish.com/2020/06/atlanta-police-walkout-following-murder-charge-against-officer-who-shot-rayshard-brooks/

Needs to be the whole country.

[OriZ 3,157]

7 hours ago, Oliversmom said:

I don't think he should have shot him.  But then again I am not a cop and have never been in this position so I don't know what I would have done.  But I do know they are talking about the death penalty in this case and I do NOT think that is warranted.  As for jail time, I don't know.  The guy did shoot the taser at the cop.  I would not want to be on this jury if it goes to trial.

I would. I'd happily hang cases like this.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

8 hours ago, laylalex said:

 

As I said before and I will say again, I am open to hearing more on this. I tended to think this was justified before, but I am not as convinced as I was earlier. I want to know more. So please don't assume I am with the DA on this, I just am open to hearing what is out there.

 

However I also think that you can't say definitively that because someone lied or embezzled in another matter means that he did on this occasion. It just goes generally to his character. So I want to say thank you to everyone here for bringing up additional points because I do appreciate them.

I can absolutely say what I said.  He lied and cheated and he stole.  People tend not to change their character.  If you think you can believe this guy, that is your choice.

Edited June 19, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[TBoneTX 45,313]

9 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

make awful self-endangering choices

There needs to be national education on:

  -- not resisting arrest

  -- not evading apprehension

  -- politely saying, "Officer, I wish to leave now.  Am I free to go?"

 

Can you imagine how many FEWER minority drivers would get into further trouble if they pulled over immediately when cop-car lights were activated behind them?