"APD SHOOTING EXPLAINED”
Before reading below, remember that officers are afforded the same constitutional rights as citizens, so whether they’re charged for political reasons or not, the facts of the case remain the same until their day in court:
In order to understand this situation, you’ve got to set feelings and emotions aside to understand objective reasonableness.
So looking at this case, what do we know?
A DUI investigation determined that he was too intoxicated to drive. The bodycam showed the officers being overly nice and polite to him the entire time all the way up until the handcuffs were about to go on, as they should’ve been.
As soon as they tried to cuff him, an all out brawl took place. Not just resisting, but punching them in the face and throwing them around.
He took one officer’s taser, threw him face first into the asphalt, stood up, and took off.
___________
So let’s pause there and see where we’re at legally.
Charges:
DUI
Obstruction X2 - Felony
Battery on an officer X2
Aggravated assault X2 - Felony
Strong Armed Robbery - Felony
And believe it or not....
Possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime - Felony
Per Georgia Law, a taser is classified as a “less-lethal” FIREARM as they do occasionally cause death.
(OCGA 16-11-106)
______________
These offenses are important because there is a case law called Tennessee v Garner
What Tennessee v Garner states is:
“When a non-violent felon is ordered to stop and submit to police, ignoring that order does not give rise to a reasonable good-faith belief that the use of deadly force is necessary, UNLESS it has been threatened.”
So this goes back to the taser being classified as a firearm that can cause death or great bodily harm.
_________
So,
They fought
He stole the taser
He got up and ran
The 2nd officer chased after him and tried to use his own taser against him, but he didn’t get a good connection.
Brooks then turns, aims the taser at the officer, and fires. Statutorily, this is no different than firing a gun.
(The taser that APD carries has 2 cartridges, so Brooks could have potentially shot the officer twice.)
The officer dropped his taser from his left hand after it appears he was hit by a barb on the video, draws his sidearm, fires 3 shots, falls against a car in the parking lot and Brooks goes down.
Brooks was not only a continuing threat to the officer since he could still fire the taser again, but he also showed and EXTREME desire to get away, with a weapon. So it is not unreasonable to have the fear that he would use that weapon to carjack a motorist sitting in the drive-thru line, take a hostage, or otherwise hurt another innocent party.
What does Georgia Law say about deadly force?
OCGA 17-4-20 (b):
Sheriffs and peace officers may use deadly force:
1.) to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon. (He did)
2.) to apprehend a suspected felon who possesses any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury. (He did)
3.) to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others (He did)
4.) to apprehend a suspected felon when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm (He did)
The officer only needed one of those requirements, but he had all 4........
Now the reason taser’s are considered “less-lethal” is because when used appropriately, you are “less likely” to kill someone vs using a gun. But Brooks hasn’t been through the training to know how to avoid certain vulnerable parts of the body, and he doesn’t understand how neuromuscular incapacitation (NMI) works, which makes it MORE likely for him to cause great bodily injury or death than if an officer used it.
And just to support the fact that tasers can and do kill, there is an East Point Officer currently sitting in prison for improperly using a taser and killing a man a few years ago.
(Eberhart v Georgia)
“He could’ve shot him in the leg!”
Right off the top, it is unconstitutional to do so. It is considered cruel and unusual punishment to employ a gun in that manner. Either an officer felt deadly force was necessary, or he should use a lesser response.
We could just leave it at that, but that's too much of a cop out, so let's discuss WHY it has been deemed unconstitutional. For one thing, that's an extremely difficult shot to make. The target is quite narrow, and in continuous motion as the suspect runs away/charges the officer. Under the best of conditions trying to hit the leg is challenging...to be generous about it. But in a life or death encounter, the officer's fine motor skills will be eroded by the stress of the encounter making the shot, turning a leg shot into a very low probability feat.
Assuming a round does hit the leg, then what? The only way a shot to the leg would immediately stop a threat is by shattering one of the bones, and stopping the threat is the ultimate goal. While it is very difficult to find a shot to the leg that will immediately stop a threat, it is actually comparatively easy to find shots to the leg which eventually prove fatal. Human legs have very large blood vessels which are essentially unprotected (femoral artery)
Now remember, we’ve had days to sit back, watch videos, discuss, and analyze this entire thing. The officers had less than a minute from the time the fight started, and less than 5 seconds to interpret EVERYTHING you just read while running, getting shot at with a taser, and returning fire
www.facebook.com
