nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Police Shooting USA. Rayshard Brooks.

lawrencesummers

Cops called because a guy was asleep in his car in the queue for a drive through.
Failed field sobriety test.
Tussled with cops.
Shot and killed.
Looks on the outset like another use of excessive Force by police, but there is so much more wrong with it.

One cop has been fired and the other is Put on leave.

Firing somebody that immediately and without due process is probably in a bid to quell the protests - (but it hasn’t) But it can’t be right, surely these matters need investigation, statements and the a just decision, which may well be dismissal / charges filed etc.

There is a big risk of the authorities in the USA actually losing their own police force if they don’t maintain the law and order and due process that everyone deserves. Has the cop in this instance actually violated the procedures That are given to him for arresting people? If a cop needs to be fired then fine, fire hundreds of them but only after due process.

RIP the victim, On his daughters birthday apparently.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Rodin

lawrencesummers wrote: »

They should update it to see if those people shoot a person running away...

He turned and fired...

Overheal

Rodin wrote: »

With a tazer he stole from him while resisting arrest for being drunk at the wheel.

How do we know in the instant that he turned and fired that the shooting cop could be certain he hadn't taken his colleague's gun in the struggle.
I personally wouldn't be waiting to find out. A decision had to be made by the police officer and I believe he made the correct one.
The criminal brought it all on himself. All of his own making.

Not all his making, he didn’t pull the trigger. Let’s not make sweeping statements that muddy the conversation.

What I’m asking, is say this all happened and cops successfully detained him anyway. Do you think the guy would be served the death penalty?

Afaik the death penalty is exceptionally rare and has narrowly focused criteria, which are not satisfied if nobody dies in the altercation or offenses. There is a lower standard if the perpetrator is acting in the furtherance of a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (no application on the night in question).

Can anyone point to a capital punishment case that set the death penalty for resisting arrest with a weapon?

Danzy

Overheal wrote: »

Not all his making, he didn’t pull the trigger. Let’s not make sweeping statements that muddy the conversation.

What I’m asking, is say this all happened and cops successfully detained him anyway. Do you think the guy would be served the death penalty?

Afaik the death penalty is exceptionally rare and has narrowly focused criteria, which are not satisfied if nobody dies in the altercation or offenses. There is a lower standard if the perpetrator is acting in the furtherance of a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (no application on the night in question).

Can anyone point to a capital punishment case that set the death penalty for resisting arrest with a weapon?

He wouldn't get the death penalty but the cop would still be dead. You may view him as an expendable pleb but he has the right to defend himself.

Overheal

Danzy wrote: »

He wouldn't get the death penalty but the cop would still be dead. You may view him as an expendable pleb but he has the right to defend himself.

You’re muddying what I am saying with a rhetorical that relates to none of what I said. I was after all discussing the scenario of when there are no fatalities, as would have been the case here with better trained police officers. This is in response to the current scenario, where the perpetrator is dead and the cop is alive, and the charges are parole violation, DUI, resisting, fleeing, and assault with a weapon - and people arguing these charges rise to capital punishment. I disagree, of course.

In the event of an officer death, yes iirc the death penalty applies (though we still see a lot of cop killers make it to trial. Hmm)

[Deleted User]

Overheal wrote: »

If one drunk perp can stungun 2 officers and kill 1 with it before they can subdue them, then they certainly appear to be inadequately trained for the real world.

Do tell, if you are being stunned how do you not fall down? Plenty of spinach?

The real world? In the real world if you threaten a us cop with their own weapon that you have just physically removed, you get shot.

It's pretty laughable though, they shot him and they were over the top.

Don't shoot him and instead get hurt, they are incapable.

It seems no matter what, it would be the cops fault that a Criminal committed a crime.

If I'm ever getting smacked around with my own baton I shall certainly think to myself "what would overheal do?" After I have critiqued myself for not subduing the person using the Vulcan death grip thus forcing the criminal to beat me senseless in the first place of course.

[Deleted User]

Rodin wrote: »

He turned and fired...

Save your fingers, that's been pointed out numerous times. He, like many on this thread aren't interested in what actually happened.

[Deleted User]

Overheal wrote: »

So the death penalty for assaulting a police officer?

The police response, as had been pointed out, does not need to be lesser than the threat they face. Police can use force that is greater than what's being used against them. In Ireland you can be shot by armed Gardai without yourself firing at the police. We don't have the death penalty in the first place even.

In the US, which I think people forget is where this happened, you can carry a firearm purely for settle defence.

You can use that firearm to defend yourself against attack. The attacker does not need to be armed and activeky shooting you before you can shoot them.

You can use that firearm to defend others that are under attack.

You can in some states, shoot someone for trying to steal your car!

What happens in Ireland and what we do in Ireland is irrelevant. It didn't happen here but even here lethal force is allowed in circumstances where no Criminal firearm was present and the crime didn't carry the death penalty.

Out of curiosity, did you disagree with the Nally decision?

[Deleted User]

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Another fact that people are not considering here is the range of a Taser is 25 feet.

Considering he was a few car lengths away when the shot was fired he was at the limit of the range If not outside it for the non lethal weapon. Against a cop wearing a bullet proof vest that wouldn’t have transmitted the electric anyway.

That’s not to even mention it was being fired by a drunk person, running in the opposite direction

The taser wasn’t a danger to the Cop if he took stock of the situation.

Thank God this drunk criminals aim was so good he was guaranteed to only hit the cops vest eh?

I mean, he could have shot him in the face, eyeball or anywhere really. Even the crown jewels but he was clearly aiming for and guaranteed to connect with the cops vest. From 20 feet away.

Overheal

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Thank God this drunk criminals aim was so good he was guaranteed to only hit the cops vest eh?

I mean, he could have shot him in the face, eyeball or anywhere really. Even the crown jewels but he was clearly aiming for and guaranteed to connect with the cops vest. From 20 feet away.

How many police officers have been killed in the line of duty by a stun gun?

Did you mean Nally v Grace Community Church?

ronivek

Overheal wrote: »

How many police officers have been killed in the line of duty by a stun gun?

Did you mean Nally v Grace Community Church?

He’s talking about an Irish case: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_John_Ward

Not really sure of the relevance though.

juice1304

Overheal wrote: »

How many police officers have been killed in the line of duty by a stun gun?

Did you mean Nally v Grace Community Church?

He dosent need to be killed by the taser, it would have incapacitated him and he had a firearm in his hands. That is justification enough. He only shot him after the attempt to shoot the officer with the taser. His life would have been in jeopardy had he been hit by the taser.

Overheal

juice1304 wrote: »

He dosent need to be killed by the taser, it would have incapacitated him and he had a firearm in his hands. That is justification enough. He only shot him after the attempt to shoot the officer with the taser. His life would have been in jeopardy had he been hit by the taser.

I agree with that argument, the trouble is they weren’t hit by the taser.

Rodin

Overheal wrote: »

Not all his making, he didn’t pull the trigger. Let’s not make sweeping statements that muddy the conversation.

What I’m asking, is say this all happened and cops successfully detained him anyway. Do you think the guy would be served the death penalty?

Afaik the death penalty is exceptionally rare and has narrowly focused criteria, which are not satisfied if nobody dies in the altercation or offenses. There is a lower standard if the perpetrator is acting in the furtherance of a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (no application on the night in question).

Can anyone point to a capital punishment case that set the death penalty for resisting arrest with a weapon?

He did pull the trigger.
You can see the gas release in the video.

yourdeadwright

Overheal wrote: »

How many police officers have been killed in the line of duty by a stun gun?

Did you mean Nally v Grace Community Church?

Well over 1000 people have died from Police Taser's in the last 20 years ,
You shoot one at the police or anyone you trying to hurt them ,

yourdeadwright

Overheal wrote: »

I agree with that argument, the trouble is they weren’t hit by the taser.

Stupid argument, you could say that if he shot at them and missed ,

JJayoo

Guy was serving a jail sentence and was let out die to Corona virus risk in prison.

One of the charges was beating his kid.

Lovely guy, a true saint

yourdeadwright

JJayoo wrote: »

Guy was serving a jail sentence and was let out die to Corona virus risk in prison.

One of the charges was beating his kid.

Lovely guy, a true saint

Actually it was torturing his kids

JJayoo

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Actually it was torturing his kids

Another poster in this threat: "Ya but like he didn't actually kill his kids so like he should be awarded Nobel peace prize."

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

How many police officers have been killed in the line of duty by a stun gun?

A taser is a weapon, make no mistake about that. You'd get jailed for having one here in Ireland. He resisted arrest, assaulted two police officers, stole a taser and pointed it at the cop. If I was the cop, I would have done the exact same thing.

You are making light that it was only a stun gun. People have died from being shocked by them. Supposing the cop was stunned and not killed, wouldn't that make it easy for Brooks to steal the cops gun while the cop was immobilised.

A cops life is in danger every single day in the States. I don't criticise the cop for doing what he was doing. I find it hard to believe that people think the cop should have let Brooks shoot him with the taser.

Edgware

He had a taser taken from the police officer. He discharged it in a attempt to overcome one officer and possibly take his firearm and shoot the other. We dont know this but it is a likelihood. Another victim of the gun culture. The police officer took him out and neutralised the risk. Better be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

Righty

Edgware wrote: »

He had a taser taken from the police officer. He discharged it in a attempt to overcome one officer and possibly take his firearm and shoot the other. We dont know this but it is a likelihood. Another victim of the gun culture. The police officer took him out and neutralised the risk. Better be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

Spot on

1800_Ladladlad

Edgware wrote: »

He had a taser taken from the police officer. He discharged it in a attempt to overcome one officer and possibly take his firearm and shoot the other. We dont know this but it is a likelihood. Another victim of the gun culture. The police officer took him out and neutralised the risk. Better be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

Could you imagine a white cop on the ground with a firearm getting tased and the sh*t faced felon having full access of said firearm .......God only knows.

Happyilylost

Edgware wrote: »

He had a taser taken from the police officer. He discharged it in a attempt to overcome one officer and possibly take his firearm and shoot the other. We dont know this but it is a likelihood. Another victim of the gun culture. The police officer took him out and neutralised the risk. Better be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

Hard to know if those are the sequence of events that would of transpired. I would put it as unlikely. From the video footage:

Rayshard Brooks was likely facing: DUI, Resisting arresting, assaulting a police officer, disarming a police officer (not sure this is an offence but it likely would of been dimly viewed) and firing a taser gun at a police officer. As stated previously in this thread he had previous convictions and was on parole so the likelihood is he was facing some pretty serious jail time. Narrative about missing birthdays and whatever are irrelevant he wasn't going to be around for them anyway. So plenty of mistakes on the deceased part.

Police officers. Respond to a call. Wake him up. (should they of asked a potentially drunk person to move a car?) Talk to him for 20 mins. Eventually agrees to a breathalyzer. Fails. Cuffs come out. Police fail to hold him. Police officer disarmed. Poor on both counts. Brooks runs. Police officer follows. Brooks fires taser (I believe) officer fires three fatal shots into his back.

Murder for me. Biggest thing I'm looking at is after firing the taser Brooks turns and continues to run away from the officer pursuing him. He did not in my eyes pose a substantial threat that lethal force was needed. He could of continued to pursue and threatened to fire (how often do we see in the movies "freeze or I will shoot!!! and yes i understand this is not the movies)

It looks frightening but the whole point of training is to remain calm under pressure. Even extreme pressure. I don't see from the clips online that lethal force was the only option left. The deceased was probably going to spend the next twenty years in jail. Instead he is where he is.

AbusesToilets

Happyilylost wrote: »

Hard to know if those are the sequence of events that would of transpired. I would put it as unlikely. From the video footage:

Rayshard Brooks was likely facing: DUI, Resisting arresting, assaulting a police officer, disarming a police officer (not sure this is an offence but it likely would of been dimly viewed) and firing a taser gun at a police officer. As stated previously in this thread he had previous convictions and was on parole so the likelihood is he was facing some pretty serious jail time. Narrative about missing birthdays and whatever are irrelevant he wasn't going to be around for them anyway. So plenty of mistakes on the deceased part.

Police officers. Respond to a call. Wake him up. (should they of asked a potentially drunk person to move a car?) Talk to him for 20 mins. Eventually agrees to a breathalyzer. Fails. Cuffs come out. Police fail to hold him. Police officer disarmed. Poor on both counts. Brooks runs. Police officer follows. Brooks fires taser (I believe) officer fires three fatal shots into his back.

Murder for me. Biggest thing I'm looking at is after firing the taser Brooks turns and continues to run away from the officer pursuing him. He did not in my eyes pose a substantial threat that lethal force was needed. He could of continued to pursue and threatened to fire (how often do we see in the movies "freeze or I will shoot!!! and yes i understand this is not the movies)

It looks frightening but the whole point of training is to remain calm under pressure. Even extreme pressure. I don't see from the clips online that lethal force was the only option left. The deceased was probably going to spend the next twenty years in jail. Instead he is where he is.

Actions have consequences. He engaged the officers with a weapon. He doesn't escape culpability for that because he shows his back. Would you make the same argument if he'd had a pistol in his hand?

The officers should've done a better job controlling him once he started fighting them, but every escalation was initiated by the suspect. He dictated the terms of the encounter.

walshb

Happyilylost wrote: »

Murder for me.

3rd degree at best!

Happyilylost

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Actions have consequences. He engaged the officers with a weapon. He doesn't escape culpability for that because he shows his back. Would you make the same argument if he'd had a pistol in his hand?

The officers should've done a better job controlling him once he started fighting them, but every escalation was initiated by the suspect. He dictated the terms of the encounter.

He didn't have a pistol though. The officer knew what he had. The if's and but's only muddy the water. He fired off a taser and continued to run. Was shot in the back twice. With one bullet missing. Any other narrative is subjective.

Overheal

Happyilylost wrote: »

He didn't have a pistol though. The officer knew what he had. The if's and but's only muddy the water. He fired off a taser and continued to run. Was shot in the back twice. With one bullet missing. Any other narrative is subjective.

The autopsy say it was in the back yet?

Happyilylost

Overheal wrote: »

The autopsy say it was in the back yet?

It has.

Overheal

Then that certainly explains the quick termination of the officer.

iebamm2580

i know its harder to hit the legs but could cops not try instead of the body, as hot to the legs unlikely to be fatal and at least it would make the suspect maybe stop if he saw bullets fly by.