Race in America - Riots Explode in Chicago

[old salt]

bill -- does Rolfe get a bail hearing before a Judge, or is it just the DA's call ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Hey a Fan, I hate to disappoint you but those 2 cops in Atlanta turned themselves in of their own volition. It did not take 30 armed to the teeth feds to raid their house at 6am.

You're on board with Pete? You want warrants served by one single policeman without a gun?

I'll tell you this much: there's NO WAY you could get me to do that job. Not a chance. This is America, and people are armed. Sooner or later, you're going to knock on the wrong door.

Wait a second. You wanted the cops to let Mr Brooks go & walk home.
You wouldn't volunteer to serve the warrant the next day ?
...after the birthday party of course. The Mayor would be happy to go along.

You think Rolfe will collect his pension?

No. He probably realizes that he's forever a marked man & will never work in law enforcement again (like Darren Wilson the Ferguson cop).
He probably just hopes to stay out of jail. If exonerated, he'll be doxed by the BLM/woke mob & any employer would be afraid to hire him.
He'd have to relocate, change his name, grow hair & a beard. Maybe Rudy or Bernie would give him a private security job. He's a good shot when running.

Actually he steadied himself. He had a big target to shoot at.

[njbill]

BTW TLD, this is what I found online and confirms what I posted this morning

Per Georgia Law, a taser is classified as a “less-lethal” FIREARM as they do occasionally cause death. ... Statutorily, this is no different than firing a gun.

You got that from a Georgia law enforcement website. I found the same thing.

https://www.georgialeo.org/post/apd

Before you get to the language you quoted, you have to go past a go fund me page for the officer. The website contains a long article defending Rolfe. The “no different than” language you quoted is simply part of their argument. No legal authority is cited.

Look, I have no problem with the Georgia cops defending Rolfe, but let’s not take what they say as gospel.

Just thinking about it logically, obviously a taser is not deadly force. Otherwise, officers would only be able to use a taser when they were authorized to use deadly force, which certainly isn’t the case. The very purpose of a taser is to be able to disable a crook without permanently injuring him or worse.

In this case, the taser Brooks stole had already been discharged twice, and thus was empty, by the time Rolfe fired his gun. The taser was the other cop’s (Brosnan). Brosnan had already fired one charge at point-blank range at Brooks while the two cops and Brooks were wrestling on the ground. (If a taser involves deadly force, was Brosnan justified in using deadly force on Brooks at this point? Of course not.)

Rolfe knew Brooks had Brosnan’s taser and that it had already been discharged once. He was right next to Brosnan and Brooks when Brosnan discharged his taser. Rolfe heard it and may have seen it. The second discharge was in Rolfe’s direction as he was chasing Brooks so he certainly saw that. Only after that, did Rolfe fire his gun.

Thus, at the time he fired his weapon, he knew Brooks was unarmed, except with a piece of plastic (the empty taser).

He had no reasonable basis to fear for his life or the life or safety of others when he fired his gun.

Even if you assume a Dirty Harry scenario whereby Rolfe forgot how many times the taser had been discharged, his actions clearly show he was not in fear of his life or safety. Had he been so, he would have taken cover behind a car or some similar object. He would not have been chasing Brooks.

I’m not sure of the exact taser range for Georgia police tasers, but Rolfe certainly knew the range. If he had closed on Brooks to within that range, he either knew the taser was empty or he did not fear for his own safety. Again, if he had, he would have stayed out of taser range.

Logically, there is no basis to suggest Rolfe was in fear of his life or safety or that of others at the time he fired his weapon.

And you Rolfe supporters keep ignoring a very damaging piece of evidence, that Rolfe kicked Brooks when he was on the ground after he shot him. As I said last night, while that fact isn’t technically critical to the murder charge, it will be very, very damaging before a jury. It will disgust them. As it should.

[njbill]

bill -- does Rolfe get a bail hearing before a Judge, or is it just the DA's call ?

Don’t know Georgia law, but I would be virtually 100% certain he will get a bail hearing before a judge. The judge will set bail. The DA makes a recommendation, but it is the judge’s decision.

I’d be quite surprised if the judge doesn’t set bail. Don’t have a feel for what the amount will be, but I suspect his brothers will pitch in to help him make bail.

While the gravity of the offense is factored in, two key factors are flight risk and danger to the community. I would think the judge will conclude the officer is not a flight risk or a danger to the community.

[njbill]

A fork isn’t less lethal..?

Hey, even a Nerf ball can be lethal. Remember the old SNL Bag o glass skit with Dan Aykroyd and Candace Bergen?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veMiNQifZcM

[ChairmanOfTheBoard]

Great post by CU77 - cross posted from SCOTUS thread.

viewtopic.php?p=158851#p158851

PS: He is a lot quicker on the uptake than he lets on!

why don't we just cut to the chase on this one- did biden change his stance on fault, or not?

[tech37]

BTW TLD, this is what I found online and confirms what I posted this morning

Per Georgia Law, a taser is classified as a “less-lethal” FIREARM as they do occasionally cause death. ... Statutorily, this is no different than firing a gun.

You got that from a Georgia law enforcement website. I found the same thing.

https://www.georgialeo.org/post/apd

Before you get to the language you quoted, you have to go past a go fund me page for the officer. The website contains a long article defending Rolfe. The “no different than” language you quoted is simply part of their argument. No legal authority is cited.

Look, I have no problem with the Georgia cops defending Rolfe, but let’s not take what they say as gospel.

Just thinking about it logically, obviously a taser is not deadly force. Otherwise, officers would only be able to use a taser when they were authorized to use deadly force, which certainly isn’t the case. The very purpose of a taser is to be able to disable a crook without permanently injuring him or worse.

In this case, the taser Brooks stole had already been discharged twice, and thus was empty, by the time Rolfe fired his gun. The taser was the other cop’s (Brosnan). Brosnan had already fired one charge at point-blank range at Brooks while the two cops and Brooks were wrestling on the ground. (If a taser involves deadly force, was Brosnan justified in using deadly force on Brooks at this point? Of course not.)

Rolfe knew Brooks had Brosnan’s taser and that it had already been discharged once. He was right next to Brosnan and Brooks when Brosnan discharged his taser. Rolfe heard it and may have seen it. The second discharge was in Rolfe’s direction as he was chasing Brooks so he certainly saw that. Only after that, did Rolfe fire his gun.

Thus, at the time he fired his weapon, he knew Brooks was unarmed, except with a piece of plastic (the empty taser).

He had no reasonable basis to fear for his life or the life or safety of others when he fired his gun.

Even if you assume a Dirty Harry scenario whereby Rolfe forgot how many times the taser had been discharged, his actions clearly show he was not in fear of his life or safety. Had he been so, he would have taken cover behind a car or some similar object. He would not have been chasing Brooks.

I’m not sure of the exact taser range for Georgia police tasers, but Rolfe certainly knew the range. If he had closed on Brooks to within that range, he either knew the taser was empty or he did not fear for his own safety. Again, if he had, he would have stayed out of taser range.

Logically, there is no basis to suggest Rolfe was in fear of his life or safety or that of others at the time he fired his weapon.

And you Rolfe supporters keep ignoring a very damaging piece of evidence, that Rolfe kicked Brooks when he was on the ground after he shot him. As I said last night, while that fact isn’t technically critical to the murder charge, it will be very, very damaging before a jury. It will disgust them. As it should.

Apparently the video the DA is using, which shows the "kick", is from long distance. Someone this evening suggested that Rolfe gave a kick to the taser to release it from Brook's hand.

Also, why would Rolfe play to the camera, performing CPR on Brooks, but then forget he's on cam and savagely kick him. It makes zero sense.

BTW, I didn't find the GA taser law statement on the website that you did and there was no supporting text re Rolfe along with it.

[njbill]

Apparently the video the DA is using, which shows the "kick", is from long distance. Someone this evening suggested that Rolfe gave a kick to the taser to release it from Brook's hand.

Also, why would Rolfe play to the camera, performing CPR on Brooks, but then forget he's on cam and savagely kick him. It makes zero sense.

YA made that argument last night, that Rolfe was kicking the taser out of Brooks’ hand.

I base what I have been saying on what the DA said yesterday. If there is clear video evidence that Rolfe was kicking the taser out of Brooks’ hand, I doubt the DA would have characterized the kicking as he did. But who knows?

If there is evidence, video or eyewitness, that corroborates this “kicking the taser” explanation to the jury’s satisfaction, then it won’t be something the jury will hold against Rolfe.

Not sure of the chronology between the kick and the CPR. If he kicked him first, then realized he was hurt and administered CPR, that probably would soften the impact of the “kick.” If he administered CPR first and then kicked him, that would be very damaging.

What the other officer says, assuming he testifies, will be critical. Not sure if the individuals in the car that Rolfe shot up had a good view of the kicking, but if they did, their testimony also will be critical.

To get off, Rolfe will need to take the stand, I think. How he handles cross-examination on the critical aspects of the encounter, post wrestling, may determine whether he is found guilty or not guilty. That, and the make up of the jury, of course.

[njbill]

BTW, I didn't find the GA taser law statement on the website that you did and there was no supporting text re Rolfe along with it.

OK, I don’t profess to be an expert on Georgia law on this issue.

Nevertheless, as I said up thread, it doesn’t make sense to me that a taser could be considered deadly force if the bad guy is using it against a cop but not deadly force if a cop is using it. And, fundamentally, a taser isn’t deadly force.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Great post by CU77 - cross posted from SCOTUS thread.

viewtopic.php?p=158851#p158851

PS: He is a lot quicker on the uptake than he lets on!

why don't we just cut to the chase on this one- did biden change his stance on fault, or not?

You change your stance on housing discrimination yet?

[a fan]

Wait a second. You wanted the cops to let Mr Brooks go & walk home.
You wouldn't volunteer to serve the warrant the next day ?

Unarmed, and alone, as Pete is suggesting? Nope.

[a fan]

Nooooooooooooooooo, how any warrant should be handled should be proportionate to threat the individual poses to law enforcement? You ain't seen many episodes of cops in your day have you? They have had episodes where the armed and dangerous drug dealer is in his apartment. Very seldom do you ever see more than 6 people ever make entry into the building. The other folks were covering any possible escape routes. If you are trying to tell me that you HONESTLEY believe that pathetic little pea brain Roger Stone was a hardened dangerous criminal then your flipping off your rocker. If it makes you happy that this should be standard operating procedure for the feds when serving warrants then I am cool with that.

Here's the first one I came across on YouTube. Arresting a 60 year old lady for a non-violent crime.

How many bulletproof vests do you count in this video?

And yet you want me to feel bad for how Roger Stone was treated?

Sorry mate, you guys aren't paying much attention to how police handle warrants these days.

All I'm asking is one standard. Pick one. But as I said: you have to be a special kind of stupid to serve warrants all day without a vest, a gun, and backup. Sooner or later, bad stuff is going to happen. This is America, where there are literally millions of guns out there.....

[Brooklyn]

Came across this gem on another site. Fascinating reading. In case one may doubt its authenticity, it genuinely reads like something from someone who has been in the field and knows his stuff first hand.


Confessions of a Former Bastard Cop


https://medium.com/@OfcrACab/confession ... 14d17bc759


I was a police officer for nearly ten years and I was a bastard. We all were.
This essay has been kicking around in my head for years now and I’ve never felt confident enough to write it. It’s a time in my life I’m ashamed of. It’s a time that I hurt people and, through inaction, allowed others to be hurt. It’s a time that I acted as a violent agent of capitalism and white supremacy. Under the guise of public safety, I personally ruined people’s lives but in so doing, made the public no safer… so did the family members and close friends of mine who also bore the badge alongside me.
But enough is enough.
The reforms aren’t working. Incrementalism isn’t happening. Unarmed Black, indigenous, and people of color are being killed by cops in the streets and the police are savagely attacking the people protesting these murders.
American policing is a thick blue tumor strangling the life from our communities and if you don’t believe it when the poor and the marginalized say it, if you don’t believe it when you see cops across the country shooting journalists with less-lethal bullets and caustic chemicals, maybe you’ll believe it when you hear it straight from the pig’s mouth.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS

As someone who went through the training, hiring, and socialization of a career in law enforcement, I wanted to give a first-hand account of why I believe police officers are the way they are. Not to excuse their behavior, but to explain it and to indict the structures that perpetuate it.
I believe that if everyone understood how we’re trained and brought up in the profession, it would inform the demands our communities should be making of a new way of community safety. If I tell you how we were made, I hope it will empower you to unmake us.
One of the other reasons I’ve struggled to write this essay is that I don’t want to center the conversation on myself and my big salty boo-hoo feelings about my bad choices. It’s a toxic white impulse to see atrocities and think “How can I make this about me?” So, I hope you’ll take me at my word that this account isn’t meant to highlight me, but rather the hundred thousand of me in every city in the country. It’s about the structure that made me (that I chose to pollute myself with) and it’s my meager contribution to the cause of radical justice.

YES, ALL COPS ARE BASTARDS

I was a police officer in a major metropolitan area in California with a predominantly poor, non-white population (with a large proportion of first-generation immigrants). One night during briefing, our watch commander told us that the city council had requested a new zero tolerance policy. Against murderers, drug dealers, or child predators?

No, against homeless people collecting cans from recycling bins.



more ..

[Peter Brown]

Nooooooooooooooooo, how any warrant should be handled should be proportionate to threat the individual poses to law enforcement? You ain't seen many episodes of cops in your day have you? They have had episodes where the armed and dangerous drug dealer is in his apartment. Very seldom do you ever see more than 6 people ever make entry into the building. The other folks were covering any possible escape routes. If you are trying to tell me that you HONESTLEY believe that pathetic little pea brain Roger Stone was a hardened dangerous criminal then your flipping off your rocker. If it makes you happy that this should be standard operating procedure for the feds when serving warrants then I am cool with that.

Here's the first one I came across on YouTube. Arresting a 60 year old lady for a non-violent crime.

How many bulletproof vests do you count in this video?

And yet you want me to feel bad for how Roger Stone was treated?

Sorry mate, you guys aren't paying much attention to how police handle warrants these days.

All I'm asking is one standard. Pick one. But as I said: you have to be a special kind of stupid to serve warrants all day without a vest, a gun, and backup. Sooner or later, bad stuff is going to happen. This is America, where there are literally millions of guns out there.....

Not sure why you’re missing this. You don’t need ‘one standard’ for every suspect. Lol. You need to treat violent suspects accordingly. Non violent suspects can be treated as such. A happy middle ground is sending warrant notices to suspects to turn themselves in. If they ignore the notices, their charges go up. A suspect can determine the treatment he gets. That’s smart policing.

[Peter Brown]

77 percent approve of the way police in their community are doing their jobs while 19 percent disapprove.

When asked whether being the victim of police brutality is something you personally worry about, 25 percent of voters say “yes,” while 74 percent say “no.” There is a stark difference by race, as 74 percent of black voters and 32 percent of Hispanic voters personally worry.

Sounds like the Democrats are doing a good job stoking the right flames! Congrats?

https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/18/amer ... rge-floyd/

[a fan]

Not sure why you’re missing this. You don’t need ‘one standard’ for every suspect. Lol. You need to treat violent suspects accordingly. Non violent suspects can be treated as such. A happy middle ground is sending warrant notices to suspects to turn themselves in. If they ignore the notices, their charges go up. A suspect can determine the treatment he gets. That’s smart policing.

I'm not missing a thing. You are. Find a policeman that's been serving warrants for 20 years. Ask them if they've had the serving of a warrant for a non-violent indictment turned violent. Watch how fast they chuckle.

In the YouTube video and the Roger Stone arrest? They're doing precisely what you're suggesting. They aren't applying one standard. They're making the call themselves.

And yet you're still complaining. Why? Because you're upset that Pete Brown didn't get to be the one who gets to decide how to serve that warrant.

Get it yet?


1. I'm proposing a standard.

2. You want the police to decide for themselves how to serve the warrant.


If you pick #2, and you think the police "did it wrong", guess what? They don't care. Savvy?

Edited for horrific syntax.....

[MDlaxfan76]

Nah....it sounds better to say BLM is anti-father and Black people rely on the government to raise their kids.

Who's saying that ? Are you hearing voices again ? We're all citing examples of extended family members helping poor & working class nuclear families succeed without needing to pay to outsource parental responsibilities.

In their literature, BLM is discounting the value of the nuclear family. It's part of the ongoing campaign to remove any stigma from single parenthood when the single mother is not equipped financially or personally to give their children what they need to succeed.

Single motherhood is hardly limited to black women.

And the stigma should indeed be removed, as it's been a means to oppress women for a long time.

BLM is recognizing reality and calling for extended family and community responsibility, rather than simply the old patriarchal model.

But, yeah, it's not about race, it's about justice.
Where BLM is putting it's own flavor on this, in some sense related to race and culture, is the notion that there's another heritage in their ancestry that is different from the "Western" model. True and indeed an interesting lens.

So you don't think young women should be discouraged from bringing a child into the world before they are married or have adequate means to provide for the child ? Is that old patriarchal model to which you refer ?

I don't think young women (or more mature women) should purposely have a child for whom they are unprepared to support in all senses, financial and emotional. Likewise, I'd like to have all children be wanted by both parents to that child, certainly by the woman carrying said child. Indeed, I support free birth control and counseling access without parental interference, as well as a woman's right to choose whether they bring a pregnancy to birth or not (though I do think that decision really should get made before the third trimester, indeed as early on as possible).

But much of the above does conflict with the 'old patriarchal model', where men make these calls rather than women. That old power dynamic is truly not ok.

And bottomline, I'm far more interested in making sure children's health, education, and opportunities in life are not defined by their parent's income nearly as much as our current system is designed.

[MDlaxfan76]

77 percent approve of the way police in their community are doing their jobs while 19 percent disapprove.

When asked whether being the victim of police brutality is something you personally worry about, 25 percent of voters say “yes,” while 74 percent say “no.” There is a stark difference by race, as 74 percent of black voters and 32 percent of Hispanic voters personally worry.

Sounds like the Democrats are doing a good job stoking the right flames! Congrats?

https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/18/amer ... rge-floyd/

or black and hispanic folks have remarkably different life experiences than whites...as a fan said, 'savvy'?

Come on, PB, get off the partisan horse.

[Brooklyn]

77 percent approve of the way police in their community are doing their jobs while 19 percent disapprove.

When asked whether being the victim of police brutality is something you personally worry about, 25 percent of voters say “yes,” while 74 percent say “no.” There is a stark difference by race, as 74 percent of black voters and 32 percent of Hispanic voters personally worry.

Sounds like the Democrats are doing a good job stoking the right flames! Congrats?

https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/18/amer ... rge-floyd/

re-posts:

shorturl.at/hyNWX

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/nyre ... rpico.html



No PB, it's not the Dems who are the problem. It's the cops whether you choose to believe it or not.

[old salt]

Wait a second. You wanted the cops to let Mr Brooks go & walk home.
You wouldn't volunteer to serve the warrant the next day ?

Unarmed, and alone, as Pete is suggesting? Nope.

Who would you take with you, besides the Mayor, of course ?