Posted on 06/20/2020 1:33:54 PM PDT by NoLibZone
The death of Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta is a terrible event, and my hope is that this helps us all see more clearly what happened. May we give Officer Garrett Rolfe and Officer Devin Brosnan the presumption of innocence while GBI finishes their investigation and while the legal system gives them due process.
https://youtu.be/Z0L-2_75Ark
run time?
I’d like to take a peek, but on a short fuse
Not as clear cut as the George Floyd case. The question is whether a taser can inflict serious bodily harm or death. I believe most police departments consider tasers to be non-lethal.
Actually that is not true. A taser to the heart can kill a person. Plus, the idiot DA said not more than 2 weeks ago that a taser IS considered a lethal weapon in GA.
Cops use tasers in many situations that do not call for deadly force. Admittedly there is inconsistency in classifying them. I was taught that the PR-24 side handle baton could be considered deadly force if applied to the offender’s cranium, but wasn’t if used as we were trained.
“I believe most police departments consider tasers to be non-lethal.”
Your “belief” is incorrect as a matter of fact.
PA for this case said, two weeks ago, that it is a deadly weapon.
IMO, two better questions:
1. Can effective offensive use of an APD taser by a detainee provide an opportunity to disarm a police officer or otherwise impair an officer's ability to exercise self-defense?
The one that has concerned me from the beginning:
2. Is there any reasonable the officer can be charged with knowing the APD taser once fired at him was then no longer operable? (If capable of multiple discharges the issue of range seems not material.)
Should read “...any reasonable basis for charging the officer with knowing...”
He's wrong. By Georgia law it is considered a non-lethal weapon.
You are correct, if by that you mean there is no evidence in the GF case that the police action was the cause of death or even a contributing element.
The Supreme Court set the standard on use of deadly force on a fleeing suspect in the Tennessee v. Garner decision in 1985. They ruled that when a police officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, deadly force cannot be used to prevent escape unless “the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.” Brooks had a Taser, not a gun. Both darts had been fired so the Taser was no longer a threat. There were no other people around Brooks and he was fifteen or twenty feet away from the officers and running in the other direction. Under the guidelines set out by the Supreme Court shooting Brooks was not justified.
The fact that the use of a taser on a cop can give the criminal access to the cop’s side arm makes it lethal in a situation where the criminal and the cop are fighting or may soon be resuming a fight.
Atlanta PD trains that you shoot if anyone gets one of your weapons. Baton, taser, gun. The taser is defined as a leathal weapon in GA.
His opinion or my opinion or your opinion doesn't matter. What matters is the law, and what the law says about when deadly force can be used on a fleeing suspect. If Brooks does not meet that criteria then his shooing is not justified. And the criteria is did Brooks pose a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to anyone? He did not.
The film talks about Rolfe seeing Brooks fire at him. Well Rolfe had to know that all Brooks had was a Taser where one dart had already been fired. Once Brooks shot the second dart then the weapon was no longer a threat. Rolfe shot after the taser had been fired.
Well that calculation had to take place in 1.6 seconds. I don't think that's enough time to review the criteria for whether the guy is a threat. The guy just punched the cop and shot the taser at him. He was a threat and had to be stopped.
I don't think that's enough time to review the criteria for whether the guy is a threat.
They had been talking with Brooks for some time. Certainly enough time to size him up.
The guy just punched the cop and shot the taser at him. He was a threat and had to be stopped.
Yes, but not through the use of deadly force since the situation didn't call for it.
They talked to him long enough to know he was drunk off his ass and he thought he was 8 miles from where he actually was (at another Wendy’s by his Hotel).
The had to arrest him, they had to cuff him.
If you fight, punch, take a weapon off a cop and fire that weapon at the cop, you are asking to get shot, not matter what color you are.
We can’t make exceptions for people that become belligerent when they drink. If you become belligerent when you drink, don’t drink and you won’t get shot.
Did you watch the video? Brooks changed 180 degrees. The cops did all they could to keep him under control with non-lethal force. They had to resort to the last resort in a split second. There was no time to think about your long paragraph of abstract concepts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.