Black Georgia sheriff says shooting of Rayshard Brooks by Atlanta police was 'completely justified'

He'd be dead.

 

Who was gonna kill him and how?

 

Perhaps by choke hold since he was trying to taser them.

 

everyone says legally it was justified, but it's a judgment call, better cops would not of done the same - they had other options

 

After listening to the DA and understanding the logic behind the charges, some of the charges are predicated not just based on the behavior of those involved, but it appears that the cops violated more than on of the dictated protocols and also the use of force policy mandated by the police department.

A few things struck me as I watched the videos, listened to the initial analysis of both the videos and witnesses. The first was, in my mind, any time deadly force is applied (whether, resulting in death or not, the incident should be reviewed by an independent group ...not a PD internal investigation and review, analogous to how a grand jury might operate to identify three basic things, was escalation to deadly force justified, were governing policies and protocol followed, and did the incident provide indication that reasonable changes to training, and governing protocols would result in improved/desired outcomes in future similar encounters. During the investigation, both the officers and any suspect’s interests should be represented by council.

Second, it appears that more than one governing policy and protocol was violated so, it is difficult to make comment on the need for specific training improvements because of that... and because of those breaches, a potential, independent of the fact of the fatal encounter, of wrong doing warranting disciplinary action might have resulted.

Because of the weapons training I am engaged with, I have worked with a couple police agencies to review arrest/ and suspect restraint procedures and training. Many outside of LE and even many from within the ranks do not have an appreciation for the dangers involved. We have done many simulations to show how quickly an situation for gaining control of a suspect can turn to be dangerous, even deadly for officers; there is always the potential for a concealed weapon to be produced even after a weapons search (there are some ingenious concealed weapons out there, everything from knives disguised as belt buckles, hidden in belt linings, etc. and even very tiny hand guns not much larger than a pack of gum) and always the possibility of someone highly skilled in unarmed combat... perhaps coupled with being under the influence of a substance that dulls pain (even the extremely rare one like me, who has a congenital imperviousness to pain...never been tased so don’t know how susceptible to that I am). There are ways to significantly rescue the risk, but if more than one officer is present, we recommend an arrest be coordinated, by more than one. There were two officers involved in the scuffle, and I would recommend in an analysis of the restraint procedure be conducted; two officers coordinating should have been able to safely control the suspect, but, regardless... it’s a good illustration of the risks involved. Arrest procedures should have as their goal, the safety of all (a goal violated in the Floyd George arrest). While the efficacy of standard protocols and policies mentioned by the DA can be debated, it can also be argued, if followed as they should have been, no one may have died.

As for those unhappy with the charges that were leveled, the officers will have their day in court. I balance that against the loss of life that occurred; but, the officers, the dead suspect, and the public all deserve that day in court and the prospect of a fair and impartial hearing. What doesn’t serve anyone is a hijacking of the narrative to suit the special interests hoping to capitalize; that provides justice for no one.

One further comment it is easy for many to fault the police in recent highlighted incidents. But we have to ask a some questions. First, are the governing institutions providing the funding and the design for effective training of officers? Are the operating policies effective to purpose?
Then too, how are we conveying to the public the risk they might incur in police contacts and how to minimize them?

When I conduct my CC training classes I spend a good deal of time of how to behave in an encounter with police no just in a traffic stop, but in any situation. One of the side benefits of that part of my training are clues on how you have the best chance of avoiding getting citations and avoiding any escalations to arrest or worse. While it would take a bit of writing to explain my advice in the long story, the short story is to put yourself in the shoes of the officer engaging you... what will they experience of you?

 

Other options?
Maybe, but we weren't there so that's speculation.
My only question is why the officer felt the need to suddenly grab the man?
After all that conversation he could have politely explained that by law, he has to arrest him.
I THINK if he had done it a little differently, mr. Brooks might not have reacted violently. Speculation of course.

Personally I would MUCH rather have an officer explain why he must arrest me and what will happen, rather than just push me to the ground 9as long as I hadn't gotten abusive with them)
It's a matter of human dignity.

We need Police reform. But we also need people to respect authority and not think they can ignore or defy it.
We need laws and we need enforcers. Otherwise we devolve into anarchy.

To me this case is not at all like the GF case.

My friends - I think I'm being eliminated slowly. Does anyone know how many points it takes before you're put on extended vacation?

 

not speculation, there were other options, killing the man was not the only option

I agree, with the rest of your post - we need cops crimes committed by cops to be considered federal crimes and handled by the fed courts, not the local da

I would also like a federal group that reviews all police cam footage, would create many jobs and cause police to behave better - maybe have AI review the video and highlight suspect acts to review

 

What else could they have done?
He violently resisted arrest then tried to taser one of them.

We cannot have people doing this.
The ONLY other option I can think of is tranquilizer shots like they use on wild animals.
I don't understand why they aren't available to Police?

 

~ They should teach police officers hypnosis. They can then safely deal with violent / uncooperative suspects.`

´ Wow ! How does that happen..? I think I use the site as much as anyone and do not see why you have points .

 

The cop escalated the situation pre-fight. It’s on record.

Evidently the officers knew the taser was worthless having been discharged multiple times. There was no threat unless you count embarrassment as a threat. Creating an environment your level of competence cannot handle.

Yeah, falling asleep in the your car at a fast food drive-thru warrants death.

Impound his vehicle and send him home. Having his auto towed/impounded is punishment enough for the stupidity.

Punishment is what the officer deserves. He’s an embarrassment to the force. Maybe annual psychological evaluations would get these types off the streets. Who knows? Protecting incompetents certainly isn’t doing us any good.

 

Who said that there was evidence that warranted an arrest? The initial responding cop didn't see any problem. Rolfe shows up and frames the guy with a bogus breath analysis test. And since Brooks was on probation he would have been sent back to prison for a parole violation.

 

If the white citizen council jurors let him off maybe Atlanta will get burned again?

 

Sure, non intoxicated people pass out in their cars in drive thru lanes, all the time...that alone justified suspicion of intoxication.

 

The sheriff is an Uncle Tom because he supports the Slave Patrol that murders black people. He would have made a good slave. Maybe the voters will kick him out of office now that they know he is an Uncle Tom.

 

The original responding cop did not consider that to have been a major problem. Then the thug cop Rolfe shows up and frames Brooks with a his bogus breath analyzer so that he can send Brooks back to prison for a parole violation.

 

Maybe I picked it up from this forum?

 

You have some evidence the breathalyzer was altered? No, no you dont. And nothing justifies resisting and grabbing a cops weapon. Normal people dont pass out in a drive thru.

 

A psycho cop teaching other thug cops how to abuse and kill people. It is no wonder that cops engage in police brutality.

 

Did the GBI impound the breath analyzer and verify its accuracy? Did the medical examiner perform a blood alcohol test on Brooks' corpse? The only evidence we have that Brooks was drunk is Rolfe's claim. The videos don't show Brooks acting drunk.

One thing we know for sure and that is that cops lie as much as trump does.

 

Nicely written.
Two more things I'd add. Unless I'm mistaken, after he had discharged the taser it was no longer a "less lethal" weapon until the cops came in contact with him as they only shoot projectiles once.
The second. Why amiably chat with him for a half and hour, let him park his car and then arrest him? I was always taught if you get a lecture they're letting you off with a warning but a lecture and then arrest are unheard of.

He's dead and they'll get their day in court to explain why they shot him in the back knowing where he lived, where his sister lived and they had his car. He wasn't going far, the taser had been discharged and when sobered up would undoubtedly be turning himself in. A more appropriate response would have been to laugh at him and yell "Where do you think you're going. We have your keys."

 

Rolfe was the driving force behind the violence. The first cop didn't consider it a problem then Rolfe showed up and saw that Brooks was on probation and framed him with a bogus DUI so that he would end back in prison for a parole violation. The fight was a bonus because it gave Rolfe an excuse to kill Brooks. As the Okie thug cop said, cops don't kill enough black people. Rolfe was elated and celebrated like he had just shot a big game trophy animal.

 

~ This was often done in the past. In the late 1980's a group of mothers who had children die in alcohol related auto accidents started Mothers Against Drunk Driving and pressure was put on lawmakers and police to take things seriously.
Police now in the U.S. routinely arrest drunk drivers . You only need to be in the car with the keys when drunk.

 

Actually, it was a legit DUI. He didn't push his car to the Wendy's while drunk.
Back in my college days I managed a bar and saw a customer out front at closing asleep at the wheel. Engine running. I went out and pocketed his keys and went back to closing up the bar. A cop pulled up and turned on her lights. I went back out and showed her that I had his keys and would be driving him home as soon as I finished closing up. She was happy with that. Being in the car drunk and in possession of your keys is all it takes, you don't actually have to be moving for a DUI.

What was he on probation for? If it was DUI then they should have arrested him immediately after failing a sobriety test but like I said to escalate after the situation had been calm and a solution offered was wrong. To shoot him was very wrong.

To the Atlantic cops walking out in protest of the charges I would say, they'll get their day in court, stop presumptuously protecting someone because he's one of yours. When you have a cancer you cut it out. If all across America good cops would sign on to expose/turn in bad cops we'd all be better off, including the overwhelming majority of good cops whose profession would no longer be smeared. It would make everyone, cops included, safer.

 

OK, do you have some evidence? A guy passing out in a drive thru is normal behavior to you?

 

I was "feeling" you right up to that point, he pointed the taser at the cop, over his shoulder as he ran. He made a very dumb choice and paid with his life.