Police Shooting USA. Rayshard Brooks.

Spon Farmer

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Nope, I've watch the whole thing.

It's easy to be calm and collected when you're questioning one calm co-operative citizen who is complying with your instructions... but how calm and composed are you if they do something unpredictable? That's the real test if these guys were any good at their jobs!

Well, these officers totally lost their composure when it mattered the most... When they needed cool heads to make sensible decisions in a more stressful situation, they just completely lost their sh!t and overreacted.

Btw those field sobriety tests are a load of nonsense if you ask me... this man was clearly intoxicated. The breathalyzer clearly showed it, and his actions showed it... not to mention he smelled of alcohol... putting a very groggy and tired drunk man through that pointless sobriety test, probably only served to further frustrate him.

They "lost their ****" after this guy took them by surprise and wrestled them both to the ground, tossed on across his back and stole a weapon.

No one is perfect and no training can prepare you deal with every unexpected situation.

Are Atlanta cos allowed to arrest someone without doing a breathalyser test? Don't they need evidence the guy is drunk?

"probably only served to further frustrate him " However you think that a drunk driver needs to be mollycoddled? Poor guy. Should Rolffe have offered him his tit to suckle on too?

And where is that video is Brooks showing any sign of this "frustration"? He is annoying but amiable and respectful the entire time. Which further adds to the shock of his violence.

Two sober guys are caught off guard by unexpected violence and don't react perfectly. **** them.

A drunk driver attacks and overpowers cops in a moment of unexpected violence. Poor guy.

BattleCorp

AbusesToilets wrote: »

So unprofessional of them to lose composure when getting punched in the head. :rolleyes:

Training goes out the window when you are getting the sh1t kicked out of you. Survival mode kicks in.

To use a quote that I used earlier (Mike Tyson). "Everyone has a plan for fighting me until I smash them in the face".

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

Why?

Why shouldn’t the criminal justice system be Just enough for cops, but Just enough for everyone else?

This is utterly baffling.

I think the cops (a large number of them anyway) are viewing the arrest and charging of Rolfe as taking away their right to defend themselves if they are attacked.

They feel their colleague is being unfairly targeted.

Tony EH

BattleCorp wrote: »

Training goes out the window when you are getting the sh1t kicked out of you. Survival mode kicks in.

To use a quote that I used earlier (Mike Tyson). "Everyone has a plan for fighting me until I smash them in the face".

I think the exact quote was "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"...and I think he was including himself in that.

Basically, Tyson was paraphrasing Von Moltke's "No plan survives contact with the enemy".

BattleCorp

Tony EH wrote: »

I think the exact quote was "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"...and I think he was including himself in that.

Basically, Tyson was paraphrasing Von Moltke's "No plan survives contact with the enemy".

I'll bow to your superior knowledge but my point remains.

The cops had training but it's hard to train someone how to react when they get punched in the head and shot at with a taser.

AbusesToilets

Tony EH wrote: »

It's clearly written in the articles that the German police used warning shots on numerous occasions in the years 2010 and 2011. If you cannot accept this, that's not my problem.

So frequently you can't demonstrate an example to back up your unsubstantiated claim? Got it.

Tony EH

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'll bow to your superior knowledge but my point remains.

The cops had training but it's hard to train someone how to react when they get punched in the head and shot at with a taser.

I think a larger question to be asked is just how much training the various States provide their personnel with, with regards to situations like this and how to control them.

I'm sure Rolfe would rather he'd handled it very differently as he sits there awaiting trial.

Tony EH

AbusesToilets wrote: »

So frequently you can't demonstrate an example to back up your unsubstantiated claim? Got it.

It's not my claim. It's Der Spiegel's. I'm merely pointing it out.

If you cannot accept that, because it interferes with your pigheaded stance on this, then that's your problem.

Overheal

weldoninhio wrote: »

In the criminal justice system you are innocent until proven guilty. This police officer was hung out to dry by his superiors with no investigation or supposition of innocence.

Would you work for someone who you now know will hang you out to dry without due process, especially when it's already a hugely dangerous and stressful job??

You realize the bold bit is still true of the officer, correct?

Do you suppose most employers keep on employees who commit gross misconduct? Are they required to keep people on the payroll who commit crimes? He shot a car with bystanders in it.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

Nope, it's not a one shot weapon. I believe that model of taser was a 3 shot weapon.

Glad you used the word weapon because many here on this thread don't acknowlede that a taser is a weapon.

Apparently the shots were all discharged so at that point it wasn’t much of one.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

Training goes out the window when you are getting the sh1t kicked out of you. Survival mode kicks in.

To use a quote that I used earlier (Mike Tyson). "Everyone has a plan for fighting me until I smash them in the face".

Then their training clearly doesn’t go far enough. As already discussed on the forum in detail US police training is woefully inadequate despite an abundance of resources.

BattleCorp

Tony EH wrote: »

I think a larger question to be asked is just how much training the various States provide their personnel with, with regards to situations like this and how to control them.

I'm sure Rolfe would rather he'd handled it very differently as he sits there awaiting trial.

They get fcukall training over there to be honest. Certainly many of them need more training.

I thought this was a very surprising fact unrelated to the Brooks case but normal soldiers in the Irish army only have to go to the shooting range twice a year. Some go more, but there are soldiers who only go to the range twice a year.

I am only an amateur shooter and I'd go to the range at least twice a month.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

I think the cops (a large number of them anyway) are viewing the arrest and charging of Rolfe as taking away their right to defend themselves if they are attacked.

They feel their colleague is being unfairly targeted.

Imagine how Americans feel when a killer cop walks out of a courtroom a free man?

I’ve no sympathy for them tbh. Their hypocrisy is on full display if they are so witheringly afraid of the criminal justice system they themselves enforce.

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

Apparently the shots were all discharged so at that point it wasn’t much of one.

If that is indeed true (I don't know for sure) who is to say that Rolffe knew that?

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

BattleCorp wrote: »

Training goes out the window when you are getting the sh1t kicked out of you. Survival mode kicks in.

To use a quote that I used earlier (Mike Tyson). "Everyone has a plan for fighting me until I smash them in the face".

So one man, who was so drunk that he fell back asleep after the cop initially talked with him minutes earlier, is now "kicking the sh!t" out of two completely sober police officers? Like he's Jackie Chan or something? :rolleyes:

The guy was basically blackout drunk... and yet still managed to take complete control of the situation, even disarming one of them of their own taser.

That series of events is enough in my mind, to show that these officers were not really very good at their job... and probably not fit to be police officers. They didn't have the right constitution for this line of work. Once the situation became stressful, they panicked and overreacted.

I wouldn't call this police brutality necessarily or racism... it's mostly just police stupidity. They were faced with a dumb drunk guy... he has a valid excuse for making stupid decisions - he's intoxicated. These cops don't have that same excuse for their poor decision making. They are held to a much higher standard than a drunk guy on the street...

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

Imagine how Americans feel when a killer cop walks out of a courtroom a free man?

I’ve no sympathy for them tbh. Their hypocrisy is on full display if they are so witheringly afraid of the criminal justice system they themselves enforce.

If he walks out of a court a free man, that means what he did was justified. He was tried and found not guilty.

On one hand you are saying everyone should face the criminal justice system and on the other you are saying the criminal justice system is wrong if a cop walks out of court a free man?

Which is it?

partyguinness

BattleCorp wrote: »

Training goes out the window when you are getting the sh1t kicked out of you. Survival mode kicks in.

To use a quote that I used earlier (Mike Tyson). "Everyone has a plan for fighting me until I smash them in the face".

He has not shot during the course of the physical fight that took place.

They were not rolling around on the ground in some sort of death match and the cop had to shoot him. His life was not in danger and the taser was not a danger to his life (by all accounts was out of juice anyway which the cops knew).

Brooks was running away, the cop dusted himself down, pulled out his loaded gun, aimed and fired. Twice.

The cop had two choices- shoot or not to shoot. He chose to shoot him dead. He chose to shoot- he didnt have to.

At least the cops will get their day in court- Brooks never will.

Tony EH

BattleCorp wrote: »

They get fcukall training over there to be honest. Certainly many of them need more training.

Mmmm, I think that may be the case across numerous programs.

BattleCorp

partyguinness wrote: »

He has not shot during the course of the physical fight that took place.

They were not rolling around on the ground in some sort of death match and the cop had to shoot him. His life was not in danger and the taser was not a danger to his life (by all accounts was out of juice anyway which the cops knew).

Brooks was running away, the cop dusted himself down, pulled out his loaded gun, aimed and fired.

The cop had two choices- shoot or not to shoot. He chose to shoot him dead.

He chose to shoot- he didnt have to.

You may be right. Lets see what happens at the trial, if it gets that far.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

If that is indeed true (I don't know for sure) who is to say that Rolffe knew that?

Another condemnation of inadequate police training. He clearly should have known how many there were and been able to process how many were shot.

All this business of “Ah but if they hesitate for one second” - just means they haven’t trained enough in that state to behave professionally.

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

Another condemnation of inadequate police training. He clearly should have known how many there were and been able to process how many were shot.

All this business of “Ah but if they hesitate for one second” - just means they haven’t trained enough in that state to behave professionally.

You are looking at this from a very different point of view of the cop.

It's easy for us to sit and disect what happend almost four days after it happened.

I can count shots when I watch a video. So can you. But it is a very different story when you are after being thrown to the ground, assaulted and had your taser stolen from you and fired at you. Your priorities aren't counting shots at that stage.

And if a cop isn't trained enough, that's hardly the cop's fault. That's his employer's fault.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

If he walks out of a court a free man, that means what he did was justified. He was tried and found not guilty.

On one hand you are saying everyone should face the criminal justice system and on the other you are saying the criminal justice system is wrong if a cop walks out of court a free man?

Which is it?

It’s that the criminal justice system is already stacked in favor of officers, so their withering fear of being subjected to it is not warranted. Qualified immunity coupled with Indemnity coupled with DAs and Judges they work with every day coupled with a Jury living in a culture that worships “the thin blue line” on a pedestal. S t a c k e d.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

You are looking at this from a very different point of view of the cop.

It's easy for us to sit and disect what happend almost four days after it happened.

I can count shots when I watch a video. So can you. But it is a very different story when you are after being thrown to the ground, assaulted and had your taser stolen from you and fired at you. Your priorities aren't counting shots at that stage.

And if a cop isn't trained enough, that's hardly the cop's fault. That's his employer's fault.

Then retrain them all. They will have to try and prove he followed department policy and it’s an uphill battle when he kicked a dying man on the ground and was within inches of murdering any one of the bystanders in that car he struck with a bullet. Doubt that’s in the handbook.

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

It’s that the criminal justice system is already stacked in favor of officers, so their withering fear of being subjected to it is not warranted. Qualified immunity coupled with Indemnity coupled with DAs and Judges they work with every day coupled with a Jury living in a culture that worships “the thin blue line” on a pedestal. S t a c k e d.

Would you agree that Brooks' shooting was justified if Rolffe is cleared in court or if the charges are dropped?

GreeBo

weldoninhio wrote: »

How would he taser him, when the criminal had already stolen his taser?? Fcuking hell. Can people not read up on the very basic facts before commenting??

There were two officers at the scene, was the other one ordering a burger?

Spon Farmer

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

So one man, who was so drunk that he fell back asleep after the cop initially talked with him minutes earlier, is now "kicking the sh!t" out of two completely sober police officers? Like he's Jackie Chan or something? :rolleyes:

The guy was basically blackout drunk... and yet still managed to take complete control of the situation, even disarming one of them of their own taser.

That series of events is enough in my mind, to show that these officers were not really very good at their job... and probably not fit to be police officers. They didn't have the right constitution for this line of work. Once the situation became stressful, they panicked and overreacted.

I wouldn't call this police brutality necessarily or racism... it's mostly just police stupidity. They were faced with a dumb drunk guy... he has a valid excuse for making stupid decisions - he's intoxicated. These cops don't have that same excuse for their poor decision making. They are held to a much higher standard than a drunk guy on the street...

Watch the actual videos that have been released.

Watch the actual altercation.

Green Peter

Looks like the police are walking off the job in numbers in Atlanta. Don't blame them. Hope BLM can manage the calls tonight. I'm sure they can and will.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

Would you agree that Brooks' shooting was justified if Rolffe is cleared in court or if the charges are dropped?

I would surely have to hear about the findings of trial before changing my mind in such momentous fashion.

Getting acquitted is easy with qualified immunity. Stupidly easy. QI can often mean a cop walks within the bounds of the law, even though you’d have a snowballs chance in hell of convincing society at large it was justified despite being strictly legal. Rodney Kings abusers walked and should not have. Courts have only made this worse in recent years:

“Because of a 2009 Supreme Court decision, lower courts have most often dismissed police brutality lawsuits on grounds that there is no prior court decision with nearly identical facts. Several recent studies, including one conducted by Reuters, have found that dozens of cases involving horrific facts, just as bad as the one involving Floyd, were thrown out of court on the grounds that there was no "clearly established" court precedent forbidding the conduct at issue.”

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/08/870165744/supreme-court-weighs-qualified-immunity-for-police-accused-of-misconduct

Reuter’s has a very detailed, multimedia article about the details of some recent qualified immunity examples to give you a taste of just how innocent cops are presumed under the law before they are even close to being proven guilty:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-police-immunity-scotus/

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Spon Farmer wrote: »

Watch the actual videos that have been released.

Watch the actual altercation.

I've already answered your question.

I've watched the altercation in its entirety... and my assessment is that two completely sober police officers, allowed a heavily intoxicated man to take complete control of the situation.

Even from the very beginning, when the first officer calls for backup for what should be a routine DUI stop... that was worrying. Why does he need an expert on performing DUI's? What is he even responding to this call for, if he can't even carry out a routine DUI stop without backup?

From the very beginning, this whole thing could have been handled so much better and more efficiently. These were a couple of bumbling cops, who panicked in a stressful situation and ended someone's life in a really cheap and pointless manner!

Spon Farmer

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

I've already answered your question.

I've watched the altercation in its entirety... and my assessment is that two completely sober police officers, allowed a heavily intoxicated man to take complete control of the situation.

Even from the very beginning, when the first officer calls for backup for what should be a routine DUI stop... that was worrying. Why does he need an expert on performing DUI's? What is he even responding to this call for, if he can't even carry out a routine DUI stop without backup?

From the very beginning, this whole thing could have been handled so much better and more efficiently. These were a couple of bumbling cops, who panicked in a stressful situation and ended someone's life in a really cheap and pointless manner!

that was the 40+ minute video from Brosnan's body cam.

That is not the video that I'm talking about now. So no you have not answered that question already

Since you are an expert on police procedure what exactly did Rolffe and Brosnan do wrong "from the beginning"?