FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[Ben E Lou]

Oh, and it's felony murder plus TEN other charges. They charged him with aggravated assault for a few people sitting in nearby cars, several violations of police procedures, etc. Seems like he has little chance of getting off on all charges unless he gets jury nullification. (Apparently even the firing of the taser was against policy because it was fired while Brooks was running away.) Now it makes more sense how he was laying out everything the officers did against policy.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

DA just said that one of the officers kicked Brooks after he was shot, and there's a law requiring him to provide first aid.

What the hell? I don't care if there is a law or not, why are you kicking a suspect in any situation where they are down on the ground? Police officers are supposed to be held to a higher standard.

Obviously there was more to the video than was posted earlier which paints a different picture. It makes you wonder if one of the officer's said something to get the guy to start an altercation to give them plausible cover if this had occurred with a different political backdrop.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

What the hell? I don't care if there is a law or not, why are you kicking a suspect in any situation where they are down on the ground? Police officers are supposed to be held to a higher standard.

I mean...this surprises you?

It fits perfectly with what many of us are saying - some police don't view the populace as citizens, they view them as subjects, or as combatants.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I mean...this surprises you?

It fits perfectly with what many of us are saying - some police don't view the populace as citizens, they view them as subjects, or as combatants.

It is what we are seeing over and over again. Police use force to punish. They just had to kick him a couple times to punish him for running. Shooting him wasn't enough.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I mean...this surprises you?

It fits perfectly with what many of us are saying - some police don't view the populace as citizens, they view them as subjects, or as combatants.

Its more incredulity and how stupid can they be?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Oh, and it's felony murder plus TEN other charges. They charged him with aggravated assault for a few people sitting in nearby cars, several violations of police procedures, etc. Seems like he has little chance of getting off on all charges unless he gets jury nullification. (Apparently even the firing of the taser was against policy because it was fired while Brooks was running away.) Now it makes more sense how he was laying out everything the officers did against policy.

I'm pleasantly surprised by this. Also I'm shocked the other officer is turning states evidence. It must have meant that he realized his partner was going against a ton of police procedures (or didn't like him, I guess). That makes the case somewhat easier - a jury is going to see one cop saying the other cop did not follow police procedures.

The fact that Rayshard Brooks was never told he was under arrest is mindblowing though - how does a cop mess that part up?!

[Ben E Lou]

I missed this in my live-posting, and it goes to the heart of felony murder: the DA said that when Brooks fired the taser and it missed, the officer knew that at point that the taser was useless, so self-defense was out the window.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Its more incredulity and how stupid can they be?

Because they get away with it. You really think this was the first time these officers abused a suspect? They woke up that morning and said "I think I will start being a bad cop now." You think they learn this behavior on their own? They never saw other officers continuing to beat an under-control suspect to punish them for non-compliance. It is systemic.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Its more incredulity and how stupid can they be?

If 99% of the time there are no repercussions for such actions, I don't know how it could really be considered "stupid."

[QuikSand]

I am genuinely confused by the felony murder charge - I don't understand what the central crime was that resulted in a death. An attempted assault? Neither a lawyer nor a GA resident, but that term has a clear meaning, I'm fairly sure.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I am genuinely confused by the felony murder charge - I don't understand what the central crime was that resulted in a death. An attempted assault? Neither a lawyer nor a GA resident, but that term has a clear meaning, I'm fairly sure.

Assault with a deadly weapon was the felony that Howard said made it felony murder. In Georgia, any death in the commission of a felony is felony murder.

[ISiddiqui]

So a friend made an interesting point - since Rayshard Brooks was never told he was under arrest, he can't have been 'resisting arrest'. And at that point trying to handcuff him (and then fighting him when he didn't submit to being handcuffed) probably violated a whole shit ton of police procedures. As Ben noted - likely why the DA went so in depth talking about procedures.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I am genuinely confused by the felony murder charge - I don't understand what the central crime was that resulted in a death. An attempted assault? Neither a lawyer nor a GA resident, but that term has a clear meaning, I'm fairly sure.

It's clear that these cops are being overcharged to submit to the masses. They certainly deserved to be charged with crimes and fired but I'm not sure murder 2 fit in Minneapolis and certainly doesn't fit this one. Unfortunately much like wave 2 of COVID, wave 2 of the unrest will be certainly be coming when they are ultimately acquitted of crimes they should have never been charged with. Maybe its all a bargaining technique to get them to plead but otherwise just more incompetent decisions being made in the heat of the moment by DA's...

Former St. Louis Police Officer Is Acquitted Of Murder In Anthony Lamar Smith Case : The Two-Way : NPR

[GrantDawg]

So you don't think a cop that shot an unarmed man and then kicked him while being held down shouldn't be charged?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[panerd]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

So you don't think a cop that shot an unarmed man and then kicked him while being held down shouldn't be charged?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by panerd

They certainly deserved to be charged with crimes and fired but I'm not sure murder 2 fit in Minneapolis and certainly doesn't fit this one.

.

[GrantDawg]

How exactly does murder not fit here? The man was unarmed. The officer shot him in the back. The officer also shot into the car behind the man, endangering other civilians. What should he be charged with if not murder?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[panerd]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

How exactly does murder not fit here? The man was unarmed. The officer shot him in the back. The officer also shot into the car behind the man, endangering other civilians. What should he be charged with if not murder?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Manslaughter. What what I read the man was armed with the officer's taser that he shot at him before this happened.

Hey I am all about people getting more punishment than they actually do. Drunk drivers especially if they cause fatalities, white collar criminals, corrupt politicians, the sick perverts the board fawns over in the child molester thread. Not how the law works. You charge this guy with murder and he walks.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by panerd

Manslaughter. What what I read the man was armed with the officer's taser that he shot at him before this happened.

Hey I am all about people getting more punishment than they actually do. Drunk drivers especially if they cause fatalities, white collar criminals, corrupt politicians, the sick perverts the board fawns over in the child molester thread. Not how the law works. You charge this guy with murder and he walks.

The taser was empty when the officer shot him. He had no weapons and was fleeing. There was no justification for shooting. There was definitely no justification for discharging the firearm toward civilians. That is aggravated assault, and that is all you need in the state of Georgia for felony murder.

[GrantDawg]

Just to be clear, in the state of Georgia, if you rob a convenience store, and in the excitement the clerk has a heart attack and dies, that is felony murder. Any death in commission of a felony is murder. It is a very low bar.

[Ben E Lou]

Yeah panerd, to reiterate:

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I missed this in my live-posting, and it goes to the heart of felony murder: the DA said that when Brooks fired the taser and it missed, the officer knew that at point that the taser was useless, so self-defense was out the window.

The DA is building the case that legally, he was firing at an unarmed man who was running away from him.

[Brian Swartz]

I would be super-concerned if it wasn't the lesser charges also being involved. I think the case in Minneapolis is more likely to be in a lot of trouble. I'm not sure where panerd is coming from, but my perspective is given the general difficulty of getting convictions on the police, it's very dangerous to swing for the fences right now.

If you miss, you run the risk of not getting a conviction at all. I think that will happen for at least one of the officers in Minneapolis. If it were to happen to Chauvin ... seems to me that's the worst possible outcome in terms of both justice and perception.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I missed this in my live-posting, and it goes to the heart of felony murder: the DA said that when Brooks fired the taser and it missed, the officer knew that at point that the taser was useless, so self-defense was out the window.

Was the DA actually correct here? Most (all?) Taser's can be used in a drive-stun mode in addition to firing cartridges. Saying that, it's no longer a ranged weapon at that point and can only be utilized in close quarters. But that doesn't mean it's simply a paper weight. Odd that the DA would not be aware of this.

[Ben E Lou]

The other cop's lawyer is now saying he is NOT cooperating. What in the world?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Was the DA actually correct here? Most (all?) Taser's can be used in a drive-stun mode in addition to firing cartridges. Saying that, it's no longer a ranged weapon at that point and can only be utilized in close quarters. But that doesn't mean it's simply a paper weight. Odd that the DA would not be aware of this.

That'd be a HUGE miss if not. That bit was basically the foundation of the entire presser (pretty sure he called Brooks "unarmed" several times,) and it'll be extremely hard to get the AA and felony murder convictions if the taser was still a weapon.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Was the DA actually correct here? Most (all?) Taser's can be used in a drive-stun mode in addition to firing cartridges. Saying that, it's no longer a ranged weapon at that point and can only be utilized in close quarters. But that doesn't mean it's simply a paper weight. Odd that the DA would not be aware of this.

The taser was useless for a guy running away many feet from the cops.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

The other cop's lawyer is now saying he is NOT cooperating. What in the world?

Wouldn't be shocking that he received a few calls. Honestly, I'd be afraid for my life if I turned like he was theoretically going to

SI

[GrantDawg]

It is possible the fact that he was cooperating wasn't supposed to be said out loud.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

Btw, there are reports that officers in Atlanta from several zones are refusing to respond to calls.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The taser was useless for a guy running away many feet from the cops.

Running away is relevant. Being "many feet" away, is not. You can close 20 feet (from a dead stop) in about 1.5 seconds. They were probably about 12-15 feet apart. If Brooks stops and the officer doesn't, he will be close enough for him to apply the taser in about one second or less.

This is actually going to be a very technical trial with a lot of use of force experts likely to testify for each side.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The taser was useless for a guy running away many feet from the cops.

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Running away is relevant. Being "many feet" away, is not. You can close 20 feet (from a dead stop) in about 1.5 seconds. They were probably about 12-15 feet apart. If Brooks stops and the officer doesn't, he will be close enough for him to apply the taser in about one second or less.

This is actually going to be a very technical trial with a lot of use of force experts likely to testify for each side.

Carmen is correct on this, it is not useless, but still with two officers there this was not a justifiable outcome.

If it is a single officer in this situation, maybe you have a case for discharging your weapon. With no backup, if they were close he could have immobilized the officer with the taser. That opens up the suspect taking his gun or further assaulting him.

I still go back to earlier thought though on training to control suspects. Two officers adequately trained on safe restraint should "usually" be able to control the situation and not lose their taser. That's a broad brush and there are many variables, but as a rule I would expect officers to be able to effectively restrain an intoxicated suspect.

[tarcone]

The taser is a 2 use taser that was used twice. The taser was useless.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

If 99% of the time there are no repercussions for such actions, I don't know how it could really be considered "stupid."

So your assumption is that all cops are bad? Cops should never be sought to help because they are going oppress someone?

So that means that our government is oppressing citizens? Therefore, more government oversight means we are just enforcing people being oppressed?

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Because they get away with it. You really think this was the first time these officers abused a suspect? They woke up that morning and said "I think I will start being a bad cop now." You think they learn this behavior on their own? They never saw other officers continuing to beat an under-control suspect to punish them for non-compliance. It is systemic.

So since the government is complicit in allowing this to happen, the government is racist?

If the government is racist why in the world do minorities back candidates that are for more government? Why do they vote for something not in their best interest?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Btw, there are reports that officers in Atlanta from several zones are refusing to respond to calls.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Just a few bad apples I am sure.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

So since the government is complicit in allowing this to happen, the government is racist?

If the government is racist why in the world do minorities back candidates that are for more government? Why do they vote for something not in their best interest?

Since our entire society is racist, of course the government is as well. However, the federal government tends to help minorities a bit more than society left to its own devices, and especially vis-a-vis the state governments. After all, the federal government went to war against the KKK in the 1870s, and forced civil rights on the states in 1950s and 1960s. And in order to drastically reverse centuries of stolen labor, you are going to need the most powerful institution on your side to do that. You just work to get that institution on your side.

Think of it this way, if you believe that reparations are necessary to reimburse people of hundreds of years of stolen wealth, you aren't going to do that by starving the government.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The taser is a 2 use taser that was used twice. The taser was useless.

I guess we'll see. Do you have a source for this information, other than the DA, as his knowledge may be suspect?

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

So your assumption is that all cops are bad? Cops should never be sought to help because they are going oppress someone?

So that means that our government is oppressing citizens? Therefore, more government oversight means we are just enforcing people being oppressed?

No...I'm just saying if there's no risk of getting in trouble for doing something bad, it can't really be "stupid" to do it. Not that all cops would, or do.

(Am I wrong that Warhammer took a REALLY big logistical leap here?)

[RainMaker]

Officer has a history not surprising.

Revealed: officer who killed Rayshard Brooks accused of covering up 2015 shooting | US news | The Guardian

[JPhillips]

Huge numbers of cops in ATL not showing up for work. There are plenty of cops that just don't believe in civilian control of the police.

[Carman Bulldog]

After watching the video again, in the instance that it was a Taser X2, which I have heard it described as and which allows for a backup shot (ie. a second probe deployment without replacing the cartridge), then I'm not convinced that both shots were used. When the first officer tries to use it in the struggle, he appears to deploy it in drive stun mode. The first time probes appear to be used is when it is fired by Brooks. Again, if this is an X2, this may be relevant. If it was an X7 or X26 then I believe it only has one set of probes to deploy before replacing the cartridge. Regardless however, all three models can be used in drive stun mode even after the cartridges are deployed.

This may be as simple as the DA being told that it can be shot twice, and then thinking because it was used in drive stun mode once and then by Brooks the second time that it could no longer be used.

It also seems like a bit of a flip flop by this DA, who just last week in a different press conference referred to a Taser as a deadly weapon under Georgia law. That may also explain why he was trying to emphasize why (he thought) it could no longer be used. It also makes me question where he is getting his information from, because from what I understand, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation was not aware of this press conference and are still investigating.

Now, this may all be (partially) moot, as I believe the lawyer for Rolfe is setting up his defence such that his client saw the flash and thought he heard a gunshot which is why he fired.

[RainMaker]

They already searched him. They knew it wasn't a real gun.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

They already searched him. They knew it wasn't a real gun.

Really depends on how thorough the search is, and aside from a strip search, you can't say that for certain.

[RainMaker]

Lot of mental hoops you're jumping through here.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Lot of mental hoops you're jumping through here.

Pray tell.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

No...I'm just saying if there's no risk of getting in trouble for doing something bad, it can't really be "stupid" to do it. Not that all cops would, or do.

(Am I wrong that Warhammer took a REALLY big logistical leap here?)

I will admit that I am making a huge leap, but there are several here that are acting every cop is a bad cop.

The point I am making, if you go in with the assumption that most cops are bad, then government is bad. Since they are a very public and very active, and in many cases the government employees that are in the most contact with citizens on a day to day basis.

If government cannot keep their most visible employees honest, than how can we keep other government employees honest? How can we trust anyone to oversee them because why aren't they corrupt as well. Or is it only the ones we perceive to be bad that are the ones we worry about?

Are there bad cops? Yes. Have I encountered bad cops? Yes. Have the majority of the cops I have encountered bad? No. Do I think there is an issue with an unwritten cop code of not turning in bad cops? Yes. But I do think it is telling when there is a large group that immediately assume the cops did something wrong rather than the other way around.

In this Atlanta case, I do think it is unreasonable in the heat of the moment to count the number of taser shots fired (its one thing if it is a single shot device, having multiple shots changes that significantly). That puts an unnecessary burden on the cop. However, to me the kicking and assault of a suspect that has been incapacitated or has been downed and is no longer a threat is a big deal and shows intent to harm rather than nullifying a threat.
That casts doubt on their motivations (to protect rather than harm) for the rest of the incident.

The other part I find interesting, I do not trust the government for a number of reasons. But, I tend to trust local government more than national. These are the people in our neighborhood and our neighbors. You can actually get to know these people. As compared to state and federal level officials. I realize I am one of the more conservative posters here, and it is a disconnect to me to see the more liberal, more big government types having a lot of trust issues with the local government employees (local PDs) but have little to no trust issues with the national types.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

I will admit that I am making a huge leap, but there are several here that are acting every cop is a bad cop.

I don't believe that. I do believe the system has been set up to protect the bad officers. That is why they feel they can get away with almost anything. There is story after story of police officers speaking up and getting drummed out of the force. Even the good cops have to stay silent.

Not to mention, if you criticize the police, then you get accused of saying "all cops are bad", or "you hate the police."

Originally Posted by Warhammer

The point I am making, if you go in with the assumption that most cops are bad, then government is bad. Since they are a very public and very active, and in many cases the government employees that are in the most contact with citizens on a day to day basis.

A giant leap, because no other government employees get the level of protection that police get. Officer are usually not fired (much less charged) for misconduct. Then the report I saw more than half end up being rehired if they do get fired. A teacher can get fired with almost no cause.

Originally Posted by Warhammer

The other part I find interesting, I do not trust the government for a number of reasons. But, I tend to trust local government more than national. These are the people in our neighborhood and our neighbors. You can actually get to know these people. As compared to state and federal level officials. I realize I am one of the more conservative posters here, and it is a disconnect to me to see the more liberal, more big government types having a lot of trust issues with the local government employees (local PDs) but have little to no trust issues with the national types.

I am the exact opposite. I couldn't name one local official. I have maybe met a couple. With the almost total destruction of local media, there is hardly any string over-site of local governments. About the only time you hear anything is when they get caught doing something. Meanwhile, in DC there are 20 reporters to every government official, and the whole nation is watching. I think the federal government is way accountable because they are under way more scrutiny. That may just be me.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Pray tell.

You're doing a ton of assuming of what the DA might or might not know along with the type of taser it may or may not have been along with what the police may or may not have done with the taser along with what they thought about the suspect having a weapon, and what kind of search needs to really be performed to be 100% sure that there is or is not a weapon.

Perhaps you're right. Or perhaps the DA has already done some of this work before charges are brought. Either way, that's a lot of mental hoops.

[Noop]

The police are very similar to organized crime. They have a us versus them mentality. The officer no longer cooperating is exactly what a MAFIA would require.

That's not saying all cops are bad but they definitely circle the wagons and protect their bad seeds.

[Butter]

Minneapolis cops were driving around indiscriminately pepper spraying folks from their cars and slashing people's tires. Atlanta cops decide not to show up to work. New York cops have tried to run people over, among other things. Many other individual cops have been filmed antagonizing protesters or literally violating the constitutional rights of reporters.

I haven't seen a whole lot of video of Senators or Representatives deliberately thumbing their nose at their constituents and if they do, they get voted out. I can't vote on the cops. Except maybe sheriff, who is a waste of fucking space.

[Noop]

I had to go to school for 7 years and pass the bar exam to be a lawyer. I needed all of that to read, interpret and practice the law.

These officers are getting a few weeks, a badge and gun to execute the law.