[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by jarodrig

Take it from a retired police officer with 33 years of service.

While don’t condone what happens in the aftermath (rioting , looting, arson etc.) this shooting was clearly NOT JUSTIFIED. The officer will undoubtably face criminal charges.

But shouldnt the officer have gotten due process before being fired? I do not believe all fact are in yet.

What is going to happen is cops are going to look the other way in doing their duties and we will all suffer.

[Pmelo]

No it was not. You don't kill a human being for stealing the taser you failed to protect. Killing a human being should be your last option. Police training should reflect this.

[billethkid]

Here we all sit with our opinions and interpretations, which is fine.

However NONE of us are/were invested in the stress, adrenaline, and emotion of the incident.

Sitting in the comfort of our home, relaxed at the keyboard watching an instant replay and making a call.

And the instant media getting out first leaves too many decision makers with the task of worrying more about how they decide will fit.

Due process has become a victim of 24/7 instant coverage, hence in actuality, no longer exists. It has been replaced by public opinion.

[jarodrig]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

But shouldnt the officer have gotten due process before being fired? I do not believe all fact are in yet.

What is going to happen is cops are going to look the other way in doing their duties and we will all suffer.

I agree. Different states and municipalities have different rules when it comes to hiring and firing.

An officer in Rochester, NY where I retired from , would have been suspended with pay pending formal hearings, investigations and the rest of the “due process”. The exception to the “due process” thing would be if an officer is in their “probationary period”. All gloves are off then and the officer can be fired without the formalities.

Rest assured , though, given the facts being presented as of today ( video, etc.) , the same conclusion would be reached ..... that is, the officer was clearly NOT JUSTIFIED in this shooting......

I might add that I spent 5 years as a Sgt. assigned to our Internal Affairs Section and during my last 11 years of duty , I was assigned as an investigator with the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office . I know quite well with first hand experience how the system works.

Needless to say , I was part of a team that responded to and investigated police involved shootings and my “opinion “ is based on actual first hand experience.


In Rochester, that conclusion would probably take months as a Grand Jury would be convened to review the case . It takes time ....

[DavidK]

Police are permitted to use one level of force higher than the force being used against them. In this case, although a taser may not be a deadly weapon, but one level up, therefore, permits the use of a gun. Police are taught to stop threats to their own death or other innocents. This does not include shooting the person in the leg or foot to stop him because a person with a bullet in the leg can continue to be a deadly threat. Had the policemen been taken down by the taser the fleeing person could have returned and taken the gun from the policeman and shot him or others. Shooting a fleeing person in the back is not justified unless the fleeing person remains a threat by engaging in the use of force that poses a deadly threat.

[LowOnCash]

Its the heat of the moment - he should have know the instant he pulled the trigger his life and ours would change forever!

God bless our divided country!

[TooColdNJ]

Originally Posted by anothersteve

Why the hell can't people just comply? This crap is avoidable if people would just comply! I'm not saying who's right or wrong, it's just avoidable.
Steve

100% correct. But shoot him??

The driver was reported for sleeping in his car, not pulled over while driving. I know it’s illegal to be behind the wheel of a car (in that condition), driving or not. Maybe he stopped because he couldn’t or knew he shouldn’t be driving.
Their approaching him wasn’t racially motivated, and he was respectful to and treated respectably by the officers. The officers clearly followed protocol.

I’m NOT suggesting that the driver’s actions were acceptable in any way. The driver was drunk, which definitely impairs a person’s judgement and subsequent actions. The officers in pursuit by foot did warn him several times to stop, and their actions were completely justified... until they they shot him.

No excuses- not even that his wife died 1- 1/2 years ago. When he was told to return to his car and “don’t go anywhere,” he could have driven away- but he didn’t. Instead, he resisted arrest, fought them, and grabbed the officer’s taser, still all clearly wrong. While tasers ARE weapons, they don’t kill anyone. By running away, the guy made things much worse than they could have been, but the officer didn’t drop to the ground, nor was he specific about where he was tased when asked, just like the guy didn’t remember what kind of drinks he had, which wasn’t relative. If a person is tased, I would think they’d know exactly where the taser hit him. Is there proof that the cop was tased? I couldn’t tell in the video.

Was the car stolen? Was there a warrant out for his arrest? Was he carrying a gun or were there drugs in his car? While he was running AWAY, he was no threat to the officers’ lives. Did he point a gun at them?

If the driver got that far away, rather than shoot the guy, they could have backed off. Not only were they in no danger, but they had his license and his car. Under the circumstances, especially with all of the current tension, shooting the driver as he ran off was not the best decision. Instead, since they couldn’t catch him, the cops could have stopped their chase- they could have had his car impounded. He wouldn’t be dead now. Eventually he would have found his way home, maybe slept it off, and then cops could have been sent to his home with a warrant for his arrest. I’m sure that’s happened at one time or another. Why not this time?

[TooColdNJ]

Originally Posted by billethkid

Firings.....knee jerk politicians (like the mayor of Seattle) rolling over and caving in to the current wave of lawlessness. Making the LEO back away from the area to allow the lawlessness to continue.

As this continues more and more LEO members will become more passive when encountering unlawful incidents.
Which will in turn lead to more criminals and thugs getting away with their crimes.

Those who serve and protect are in danger of being emasculated by those who run cities and states.

What individual, black or any other, in their right mind in this day and age would fight police, resist arrest, run away and shoot at police???

Obviously, being drunk, the man wasn’t in his right mind. Did he shoot at the officers to KILL THEM? With a taser? There are times when LEO could be more passive, not all the time. In this situation there were other options, not in all situations.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

It does not matter what he was or wasn’t doing on video before he was shot , he was running away and was only carrying a non lethal weapon at the time . . You cannot shot a man running away in a he back and I can’t believe so many people can seem so gleeful over someone dying over such a trivial crime , they had his car and ID could have picked him up anytime

[Scorpyo]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

The suspect should not have resisted arrest for being .02 above the limit...but it shouldn't have been a death sentence.

The cop should not have shot someone in the back, while he was running away... when the cop's life was in no danger.

And NO, a taser is not considered a lethal weapon.

Why was the cop picking up his brass for 2 minutes...before he even went to the victim?

Maybe because he knew once the detectives figured out how far away the victim was, while running away...he would be in deep doo-doo?

And NO, this is NOT justification for citizen violence or property damage.

It (along with the posts we'll see here) does, however, show...exactly why black people across the nation are so angry.

I don’t know if you really believe what you say or just like stirring the pot. You said “Lasers are not Lethal”. You didn’t say lasers can’t kill. Google “Can lasers kill”. Yes they can and lots of people have been killed by them. What if the cop wasn’t killed and only disabled? Guess what, his gun would have been available to be taken. Of course he would not take the gun, everyone knew he was a nice guy. But he only resisted. I noticed most media outlets are not showing the video where the gentle perp punched the cop in the face. I think that exceeds gentle resistance. Lastly the cop shot him in the back. The perp had his head and arm turned to the cop. The cop should have aimed for his head which was facing the cop then he would not have shot him in the back. Or the cop should have asked him to turn around. After all he was being so compliant.

[billethkid]

At this point it seems what has been eliminated is the usual due process leading to a conclusion and then action.

The need for an investigation has been replaced by a need to satisfy the media and what ever current special interest is the hot topic of the day.

[Bernie1]

I think your asking the wrong questions.
1. Why did he resist ?
2. Why did he take the taser?
3. Why did he run?
3. Why did he fire at the cop?
4. Would you have done any of these things?

Number 1 started the chain of events. Right or wrong - take out #1 and none of this would have happened.
No this man should not pay with his life for bad judgement we need a different way of apprehending people who refuse to cooperate with law enforcement.

[Joanne19335]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

missed a significant detail.................the thug started to physically fight the officers once an officer got behind him to handcuff him.


guess he was never taught not to fight an officer.

The officer should’ve taken into consideration that the man was drunk and disoriented. The officer should have told Brooks that He was under arrest for DUI rather than simply pull his hands behind him. Brooks panicked and ran with the taser. Brooks never should have died by getting 2 rounds in the back. He never should have resisted, but this could have been handled differently. Now a cop will lose his job and probably be charged with manslaughter or worse.

[transplanted]

Originally Posted by Kenswing

I hope the officer sues for wrongful termination. He will win..

I am personally VERY familiar with bold face lying accusations that were proven to be so, against an officer who after 8 months of suspension, humiliation, loss of about $50K in part time work, $60K expense to tax payers to investigate, a grand jury who couldn't even find the drunk/high scum bag to question, was told the lying rat wouldn't even be brought up on filing a false police report because it might deter true victims. UNTOUCHABLE - it's not politically correct.

[bluecenturian]

Please know the facts before you speak your ignorance.

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), is a civil case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force 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."[Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), is a civil case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force 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."

The manufactures of tasers recommend that officers get tased during training to understand the incapacitation that occurs. If a person tases an officer, the officer has absolutely no way of weapon retention and the person can know take his/her gun to use against him.

The judge in the earlier case 2 weeks ago said that Atlanta officers used deadly force when they tased the teens in the car. Can’t have it both ways.

The officer was NOT picking up his brass, he picked up his tased which he dropped, which was deployed and did not work. For you to say something you have no clue about is reckless.

I’m sure you didn’t hear about the Ft Meyers officer arrested for child abuse because he stopped a woman for speeding and she had drugs in her and rather than arrest her he gave her a citation. 3 months later she was high and driving and got into an accident and killed her daughter. The officer is arrested for failing to take action 3 months prior.

What do you want ? Arrest criminals, look the other way because they are just innocent people. Maybe you should Ride along with the cops and you decide when they should make an arrest based on your EXPERT knowledge.