• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Black man shoots taser at white police officer. Officer then shoots and kills man. Officer gets fired

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
27,454
1,409
126

The authorities said the man, Rayshard Brooks, 27, had run from the police on Friday night after failing a sobriety test and grabbing a Taser from an officer during a struggle with him.
Mayor Bottoms said that security footage appeared to show that Mr. Brooks had fired the Taser toward the officer, who was chasing him before he was killed, but that she did not consider that a justification for the shooting.

The officer has been fired.
The police chief has also resigned.


this seems like a clear case of self defense to me.
What am i missing that not only was the officer wrong, he was so wrong that he got fired?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mistercrabby

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
6,943
2,446
136
Probably that he let his taser be stolen which helped precipitate the incident?

We've seen so many reports of cops being bad or good.. but the ones where a cop let his taser or his gun been stolen?

How often have you heard that?
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,375
10,060
136
Because Brooks had a non-lethal weapon he took from the officer, was running and was shot in the back.

Police can use deadly force to protect their own lives. They can't use it to gun down someone who is trying to escape a DUI arrest.

The proper procedure was to get into the car and follow him, and call for backup. Or he could have just let him run away. He wasn't going to escape arrest for long. They had his car and probably his license!
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
He needlessly shot and killed a man.

I'd imagine that most people would consider themselves lucky if they only lost their job for doing that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse and Bitek

Atari2600

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2016
1,239
1,407
136
Because Brooks had a non-lethal weapon he took from the officer, was running and was shot in the back.

Police can use deadly force to protect their own lives. They can't use it to gun down someone who is trying to escape a DUI arrest.
Correct.

Can't shoot someone for not following Cartman's maxim: "respect my authoritah"



edit: And the rest of the Western world thinks its fukkin mental that they actually have to point this out to Americans.
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
4,600
1,927
136
Correct.

Can't shoot someone for not following Cartman's maxim: "respect my authoritah"

One could argue that if hit with the taser the officer would have be at risk for death (the guy could come back and beat him up). However I don't buy the argument as I believe two officers were there and he was clearly running away.

The officers could have de-escalated the situation well prior. Or the could have used non-lethal weapons and tactics. However they chose to kill him which is clearly wrong..I'm not holding by breath they'll be convicted but I firmly believe it was a wrongful death.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,375
10,060
136
As to why Brooks tried to get away, it obviously wasn't a rational decision. He was moderately intoxicated. But my best guess is that he was worried they were going to sit on his neck like George Floyd. I imagine that seeing a video like that, which basically everyone in the country has seen, is going to cause varying behaviors when one encounters police. Ranging from extreme compliance to aggression and evasion. All motivated by fear.
 

Atari2600

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2016
1,239
1,407
136
So it appears they may actually have tasered him before the shots were fired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
30,391
3,918
126
Because Brooks had a non-lethal weapon he took from the officer, was running and was shot in the back.
I saw the video, and the notion of "in the back" is sort of wrong. The man turned enough to fire the taser. It was completely ineffective of course. But it was that same split second the officer fired in response. Sure he hit him in the back, that I have no doubt, but it wasn't for nothing. It was for discharging the taser at the officer.

Is that right or wrong?
I suppose they haven't had to face that issue enough to make a crystal clear policy. Do officers consider the taser a deadly weapon or not? I think their prevailing wisdom is "not" (though I dispute that). So there is no reason to shoot, especially after the taser shot missed. Therefore it was wrong for him to shoot. There was no justification for it.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,375
10,060
136
I saw the video, and the notion of "in the back" is sort of wrong. The man turned enough to fire the taser. It was completely ineffective of course. But it was that same split second the officer fired in response. Sure he hit him in the back, that I have no doubt, but it wasn't for nothing. It was for discharging the taser at the officer.

Is that right or wrong?
I suppose they haven't had to face that issue enough to make a crystal clear policy. Do officers consider the taser a deadly weapon or not? I think their prevailing wisdom is "not" (though I dispute that). So there is no reason to shoot, especially after the taser shot missed. Therefore it was wrong for him to shoot. There was no justification for it.
There are several videos from different perspectives. You'll have to link me to the one you're talking about. I can't really tell from what I've seen whether the officer fired at the split second he turned and either pointed or fired the taser that him or if it was a few second later.

But my point is this: he was RUNNING. He wasn't interested in harming the police. The taser he took was a non--lethal deterrent that he was using to get away. There was no need to shoot him. They could have picked him up later. They didn't even have to chase him when he ran. He didn't have a deadly weapon and they had his address.

Lethal force can't be used to prevent an escape except in narrow situations where the person is suspected of a violent felony and is armed with a deadly weapon.

Quoting SCOTUS here:

deadly force...may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others.
This was an inappropriate use of lethal force.
 
Last edited:

zzyzxroad

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2017
3,202
2,212
136
One could argue that if hit with the taser the officer would have be at risk for death (the guy could come back and beat him up). However I don't buy the argument as I believe two officers were there and he was clearly running away.

The officers could have de-escalated the situation well prior. Or the could have used non-lethal weapons and tactics. However they chose to kill him which is clearly wrong..I'm not holding by breath they'll be convicted but I firmly believe it was a wrongful death.
My though, it's clear the guy put himself in a very dangerous position. I also believe he was intoxicated and that was the root of the initial contact. The body cam footage shows the cops trying to tase him and the two were over powered. I don't however think the use of a lethal weapon was appropriate here though. The officer wasn't alone so his partner could have justifiably prevented the guy from circling backcoming back and using his gun agains him.

They should have pursued him and called in some backup. The man was guilty of being intoxicated and resisting arrest. Neither justify homicide.

We also need to ramp up smart gun tech and make it mandatory for all law enforcement sidearms.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
28,449
14,364
136

The authorities said the man, Rayshard Brooks, 27, had run from the police on Friday night after failing a sobriety test and grabbing a Taser from an officer during a struggle with him.
Mayor Bottoms said that security footage appeared to show that Mr. Brooks had fired the Taser toward the officer, who was chasing him before he was killed, but that she did not consider that a justification for the shooting.

The officer has been fired.
The police chief has also resigned.


this seems like a clear case of self defense to me.
What am i missing that not only was the officer wrong, he was so wrong that he got fired?
Because rules do not allow police to use lethal force when there is no lethal threat to officers or others. He was running away. In fact the office put lives of other bystanders in danger by firing.

In this case we had a guy sleeping in his car possibly drunk. Cops already had his ID and car. They should have sent him home with a summons and Uber. Could have arrested him later if warranted.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pmv

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
28,449
14,364
136
I saw the video, and the notion of "in the back" is sort of wrong. The man turned enough to fire the taser. It was completely ineffective of course. But it was that same split second the officer fired in response. Sure he hit him in the back, that I have no doubt, but it wasn't for nothing. It was for discharging the taser at the officer.

Is that right or wrong?
I suppose they haven't had to face that issue enough to make a crystal clear policy. Do officers consider the taser a deadly weapon or not? I think their prevailing wisdom is "not" (though I dispute that). So there is no reason to shoot, especially after the taser shot missed. Therefore it was wrong for him to shoot. There was no justification for it.
Their own department defines tasers as non lethal.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,789
3,193
126

The authorities said the man, Rayshard Brooks, 27, had run from the police on Friday night after failing a sobriety test and grabbing a Taser from an officer during a struggle with him.
Mayor Bottoms said that security footage appeared to show that Mr. Brooks had fired the Taser toward the officer, who was chasing him before he was killed, but that she did not consider that a justification for the shooting.

The officer has been fired.
The police chief has also resigned.


this seems like a clear case of self defense to me.
What am i missing that not only was the officer wrong, he was so wrong that he got fired?
What you are missing is that a taser is NOT a deadly weapon.....so says the manufacturer and the Police have used that argument to justify using a taser on somebody@!
Now that the table is turned the Police are saying he stole my taser and was going to use it ion me! Now the Police want you to believe that a taser is a deadly weapon! THEY CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
Then if you watch the video there was no need to shoot and kill that man!
They already knew where he lives and had his address because they ran his plates and they also had his information from his drivers license!
They could have waited for back up!


With that said -- everyday that goes by since the killing of George Floyd cops around the country it seems are wanting to get in on the action! Almost like it is a game show among cops to see who can do the dumbest thing to a citizen!
Plus they are proving what most of us on these forums already know -- there are more than just a few bad cops!!
 

zzyzxroad

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2017
3,202
2,212
136
Their own department defines tasers as non lethal.
That's splitting hairs anyway. I dont see how anyone watches that video and thinks the officer's life was in danger when he gun this man down. Since it wasn't, end of discussion. Not justifiable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,375
10,060
136
My though, it's clear the guy put himself in a very dangerous position. I also believe he was intoxicated and that was the root of the initial contact. The body cam footage shows the cops trying to tase him and the two were over powered. I don't however think the use of a lethal weapon was appropriate here though. The officer wasn't alone so his partner could have justifiably prevented the guy from circling backcoming back and using his gun agains him.

They should have pursued him and called in some backup. The man was guilty of being intoxicated and resisting arrest. Neither justify homicide.

We also need to ramp up smart gun tech and make it mandatory for all law enforcement sidearms.
I don't think they should have even pursued him. At least not on foot. They could pursue by vehicle or just go to his house later and pick him up, after he sobered up and cooled off. Their pursuit of the man, with guns drawn, is why he tried to use the taser to facilitate his escape. This is a perfect example where police need to learn to de-escalate a situation where someone is clearly fearful and agitated. Pursuing him on foot with guns drawn was a bad decision.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,375
10,060
136
Because rules do not allow police to use lethal force when there is no lethal threat to officers or others. He was running away. In fact the office put lives of other bystanders in danger by firing.

In this case we had a guy sleeping in his car possibly drunk. Cops already had his ID and car. They should have sent him home with a summons and Uber. Could have arrested him later if warranted.
Only thing I disagree with here is that they could have sent him home with a summons. If they had probable cause to believe he was intoxicated, which they did, they had to arrest him and take him in for a BAC test. That is what they always do with DUI's because the field sobriety test and portable breath test aren't reliable enough for a DUI conviction.

Where they went wrong was what they did after they tried to cuff him and he resisted. At that point, just letting him run was the obvious choice. Now that he's escaped, if they pick him up later it doesn't matter that they didn't get the BAC test because every state has a law which says if you refuse to submit to the BAC test, you get the same penalty as you would for a proven DUI. They really didn't have any good reason to even chase after him, let alone shoot him.
 

zzyzxroad

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2017
3,202
2,212
136
Only thing I disagree with here is that they could have sent him home with a summons. If they had probable cause to believe he was intoxicated, which they did, they had to arrest him and take him in for a BAC test. That is what they always do with DUI's because the field sobriety test and portable breath test aren't reliable enough for a DUI conviction.

Where they went wrong was what they did after they tried to cuff him and he resisted. At that point, just letting him run was the obvious choice. Now that he's escaped, if they pick him up later it doesn't matter that they didn't get the BAC test because every state has a law which says if you refuse to submit to the BAC test, you get the same penalty as you would for a proven DUI. They really didn't have any good reason to even chase after him, let alone shoot him.
A totally agree.
 

Atari2600

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2016
1,239
1,407
136
This is a perfect example where police need to learn to de-escalate a situation where someone is clearly fearful and agitated. Pursuing him on foot with guns drawn was a bad decision.
Too many of them think they are John Wayne or more lately, fukkin Robocop in their riot gear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi420

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
28,683
4,416
126

The incident began when police responded to a call Friday night about a man sleeping in a parked vehicle in the Wendy's drive-through lane, causing other customers to drive around it, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said in a statement.

When Brosnan arrives to the scene, Brooks is asleep behind the wheel in the drive-through lane, according to his body camera video. Footage from both officers' body cameras and from their vehicles shows them speaking with Brooks for nearly 30 minutes outside the Wendy's.

Brooks says he does not have any weapons on him and the officers pat him down to confirm as much, the videos show. Howard said their interaction was "cordial" and noted that Brooks answered the officers' questions.

After Brooks takes a breathalyzer test, one officer tells him to put his hands behind his back and they move to handcuff him, the videos show.

Brooks then resists the arrest and begins struggling with the officers as they tussle on the ground for about 30 seconds, according to videos from the scene.

"Stop fighting! Stop fighting!" an officer says, according to audio from the body camera.
During the struggle, Brooks grabs an officer's Taser, escapes their grasp and starts running away from the two, the videos show.
"He's got my f---ing Taser," an officer says, according to the body camera footage.
utter horseshit. wake the guy up, ask him to move, and be done with it.

why is he being breathalyzed? was there any suspicion that he might be drunk? if not, let him go.

and he has your taser? let him run. it's not like the dude is going to become an international fugitive trying to slip in and out of countries.

christ almighty. pretty sure every police department needs to be dissolved, not just the "bad" ones.

have like 10 officers who respond to serious crime in progress. all other resources should be social workers of some kind whose goal is to help people. not kill them.

protect and serve my ass.

also:
Crime Stoppers of Atlanta is offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and indictment for those involved in the Wendy's fire.
not gonna happen in a million fucking years.
 

zzyzxroad

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2017
3,202
2,212
136



utter horseshit. wake the guy up, ask him to move, and be done with it.

why is he being breathalyzed? was there any suspicion that he might be drunk? if not, let him go.

and he has your taser? let him run. it's not like the dude is going to become an international fugitive trying to slip in and out of countries.

christ almighty. pretty sure every police department needs to be dissolved, not just the "bad" ones.

have like 10 officers who respond to serious crime in progress. all other resources should be social workers of some kind whose goal is to help people. not kill them.

protect and serve my ass.

also:


not gonna happen in a million fucking years.
I just had to open that article. It links to this one which is heartbreaking.


Predictably fox is posting article after article boiling things down to, if you dont want to die dont commit crime. One including a bunch of bernie kerik quotes.
 
Last edited:

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
8,375
3,849
136
The entire incident

The police and our culture have embraced tasers as the end all be all non lethal weapon.
Rayshard should not have been killed for pointing a non lethal weapon at an officer.
There is no excuse for that.

That entire interaction seemed to be going fine and I don't see racism as the issue with that officers reaction. I see more it more as a result of the militarization of American police where "neutralize the perceived threat as soon as possible with lethal force" is so drilled into their training.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,398
13,248
126
Probably that he let his taser be stolen which helped precipitate the incident?

We've seen so many reports of cops being bad or good.. but the ones where a cop let his taser or his gun been stolen?

How often have you heard that?
Heard?
Rarely.
How often does it happen?
Lots.

The department always covers up cop failures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fenixgoon

ASK THE COMMUNITY