Image 01 Image 03

Reports: Atlanta Police Walking Off the Job Following Officer Charged With Felony Murder of Rayshard Brooks

Reports: Atlanta Police Walking Off the Job Following Officer Charged With Felony Murder of Rayshard Brooks

Atlanta Police Department denies the walkout via Twitter.

Fulton County DA Paul Howard announced 11 charges against former officer Garrett Rolfe, including felony murder, in the shooting death of Rayshard Brooks.

I’m seeing reports on Twitter that Atlanta police officers have started to walk off the job in protest of the charges. The Atlanta Police Department denied the walk-out on Twitter.

Walking Off The Job

What Happened

Rolfe and officer Devin Brosnan responded to a call of an unresponsive man in a Wendy’s drive-thru:

The officers were called late Friday over complaints of a car blocking the restaurant’s drive-thru lane. Brosnan arrived first and found Brooks alone in the car, apparently asleep. Brooks agreed to move the car, showed his license, and Rolfe arrived minutes later to conduct a sobriety check.

The two officers’ body cameras and the dash-mounted cameras in their patrol cars showed they spent more than 40 minutes peacefully questioning Brooks. The fighting erupted when they tried to handcuff Brooks.

One of the dash cameras recorded the brawl. As Brooks fights to stand, Brosnan presses a Taser to his leg and threatens to stun him. Brooks grabs the Taser and pulls it away. He struggles to his feet, the Taser in his hand, and starts running.

Rolfe fires his Taser and a yelp can be heard above the weapon’s electric crackle. Rolfe runs after Brooks, and seconds later three gunshots sound.

Howard said his office spoke with three witnesses and observed eight video recordings – including body camera footage from the two officers, surveillance footage from the Wendy’s, and cell phone video from a witness.

Both officers’ body cameras were knocked to the ground in the struggle, and none of the four police cameras captured the shooting. Footage released from a Wendy’s security camera showed Brooks turn and point an object in his hand at one of the officers, who was steps behind him. The officer draws his gun and fires.

After the shooting, Howard said Rolfe was heard on camera saying “I got him.”


Here are more details about the charges against Rolfe:

At a Wednesday afternoon press conference, Fulton County D.A. Paul Howard announced that former Atlanta Police Officer Garrett Rolfe is facing 11 charges, including felony murder, multiple counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, first-degree criminal damage to property, and two counts of violating of his oath as a public officer.

Officer Devin Brosnan has been charged with a count of aggravated assault and two counts of violating his oath of office. He is now cooperating with the District Attorney’s Office as a witness. Howard said it may be the first time ever an Atlanta police officer has testified against a fellow officer in the same department, noting that he was “almost shocked” Brosnan agreed to do so.

If convicted, Rolfe could be sentenced to either life in prison without parole or the death penalty.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Golden Retrievers breathe a sigh of relief.

The civil war is escalating. I know which side I am on.

I’d walk with them.
Bring it on.

What else can they do? Do your job, risk your life to do your job and then this BS. They’re not going to risk being railroaded for a civil service gig. Screw that. It’ll be nationwide before long. Then comes the war. For us it’ll be a war of self-defense but all the same, wars war.

    It doesn’t have to be a war and “self-defense” is not going to accomplish much. We just need to get organized and show large numbers retaking our streets and neighborhoods.

    How about organizing huge marches down our streets everyday supporting our police? How much would you bet that it would be a very diversified and non-partisan crowd?

    The police could also get those of us who own guns organized for a show of arms if need be. Citizens overwhelmingly support their local police. They need to start talking to us and getting us organized to stand our ground. It’s OUR constitution and all of our rights are being taken away from us and so far, we aren’t doing anything about it.

      “How about organizing huge marches down our streets everyday…”

      We work.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to Pasadena Phil. | June 18, 2020 at 7:07 pm

      Sell, everyone better be armed, because people who do not like police do so because they and their associates have a sky high crime rate. They would feel entitled to attack. It would also be wise to have snipers deployed along the route, to make sure none of the attackers get away without paying.

Dantzig93101 | June 17, 2020 at 9:22 pm

The 75-year project of Communists and their fellow travelers has been to break the United States so it could no longer function as a country. Originally, they wanted to ensure the victory of the Soviet Union, but now it seems their goal is to get revenge for the fall of the Soviet Union.

It would be in everyone’s best interest to resolve the situation peacefully. It remains to be seen if America’s enemies will give us that option.

legacyrepublican | June 17, 2020 at 9:24 pm

Listened to the link to Zone 6 radio above for about ten minutes. Haven’t heard one thing. As silent as could be. Chilling.

    I did the same, completely quiet, I am sure they have multiple channels availalble to use

    Pelatiah Adams in reply to legacyrepublican. | June 18, 2020 at 8:06 am

    My kids live in north Buckhead and they said the same thing last night. My daughter has ordered a Glock to add to their household protection. They live adjacent to some pretty bad apartment complexes and have issues anyway, you should see their ring doorbell footage!

    I hope all those hypocrite commie liberals who live along West Paces Ferry and vote D are scared to death right now. They deserve whatever’s coming their way.

self quarantine for 2 weeks, covid blue flu virus

Talk about piling on charges…11? Wtf

Mayor and da need to resign. Our big city governments have gone lawless.

    buck61 in reply to stl. | June 17, 2020 at 9:43 pm

    DA is up for re-election, he is trying to save his job

      Bookdoc424 in reply to buck61. | June 17, 2020 at 9:51 pm

      You hit the nail on the head. He could not care less about what happens to this officer or even the people of Atlanta. Just soundbites for the campaign…

      Sanddog in reply to buck61. | June 18, 2020 at 2:13 am

      He’s in a run-off. He’s under criminal investigation by the GBI and this is meant to placate the feral mobs and save his ass.

      amwick in reply to buck61. | June 18, 2020 at 6:51 am

      Some people believe that he knows he cannot win reelection, and because of that he is swinging for the bleachers, going out with a bang, more or less.

      IDK.. I think a DA is supposed to want justice, not pandering.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to buck61. | June 18, 2020 at 8:27 am

      “On another front, his family and legal team won’t even acknowledge he has a police record”

      That is because they are all cut from the same cloth. Criminal activity and being bald faced liars go hand in hand.

      This is what Black Liars Matter have been doing all along. Black criminal is killed, they concoct a false narrative and push it in media, a year later there is enough information to know that most of their narrative was lies.

      As long as they can get away with this with no consequences, they will continue.

Were I a cop in Atlanta, I would quit. Today. There are other places to work in law enforcement and some will welcome your presence.

Atlanta may well be the first place to find out just how bad the inner city can be without any semblance of law enforcement.

    Milhouse in reply to Barry. | June 18, 2020 at 12:18 am

    I wouldn’t quit, and walk away from my seniority and pension and entitlements. Let them fire me, or buy me out. But I would work strictly to rule, and refuse to get into any situation that might involve having to arrest a black person, without receiving a direct order in writing. With the DA’s signature.

      CKYoung in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 12:30 am

      I’m reading that as sarcasm Milhouse, yes?

        Milhouse in reply to CKYoung. | June 18, 2020 at 12:38 am

        Not really. Just realism. If I were called to a situation that might involve having to arrest a black person I would want assurance that I wouldn’t end up being charged with a crime for doing my job, so I would insist on written orders, countersigned by the DA.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 7:41 am

          But words on paper mean nothing except what someone wants them to mean or can be completely ignored. Such a protection would be meaningless.

      Barry in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 11:16 am

      Quitting does not eliminate pension benefits.

      One can also quit by refusing to do anything beyond showing up to the office. Then you get your “firing”.

      There are many smaller towns that would appreciate experienced officers.

        JusticeDelivered in reply to Barry. | June 18, 2020 at 7:22 pm

        “There are many smaller towns that would appreciate experienced officers.”

        I was doing due diligence regarding a school for one of my children who is special needs. I called the local police chief. Initially, he was wary, but eventually he opened up.

        It turned out that he had been a big city cop, got tired of it, and moved his family to the small town.

        He was a really sharp person, well educated.

        Show me a city of any significant size which is not a shit hole.

        Originally, cities were trading centers, then they morphed into manufacturing centers. Today highly automated manufacturing companies no longer need lots of bodies, and that means most cities will continue to decay.

      Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 11:39 am

      It won’t work, especially in Atlanta, where the population is 51% Black. Sooner or later you are going to have to effect an arrest or other enforcement action. If you refuse to do so, you can face both civil and criminal penalties for misfeasance or nonfeasance. The only way to protect yourself is to not show up for work. The worst that can happen, in that case, is that you are terminated. Of course, if a courageous member of the Atlanta PD wanted to send a big message, he could always arrest the DA for Grand Theft, for the $145,000 that he allegedly misappropriated. Apply the same standards to elected officials that are being applied to the rank and file LEOs in this country.

        Barry in reply to Mac45. | June 18, 2020 at 5:19 pm

        Good Point.

        Subotai Bahadur in reply to Mac45. | June 18, 2020 at 6:23 pm

        1) If you have so much vested in your pension where it is holding you, it is time to consider going for a disability pension and changing lines of work.

        2) If you don’t have that much vested, then get those resumes out and go to a department in America.

        Subotai Bahadur

healthguyfsu | June 17, 2020 at 9:56 pm

Past time for the shitpot of Atlanta to burn anyways. What a hellhole that place is.

    Dantzig93101 in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 17, 2020 at 10:25 pm

    It’s a total mystery how Atlanta went bad. It was originally built on magic dirt that caused its success. But now the dirt seems to have turned tragic. Inexplicable. Maybe they didn’t sacrifice enough babies at PP.

    amatuerwrangler in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 17, 2020 at 11:26 pm

    “Don’t you mean ‘…burn again.'”, quoth the ghost of Wm Sherman. That’s the ghost of U S Grant you hear chuckling in the background.

Close The Fed | June 17, 2020 at 9:58 pm

Poor officer to testify against the other. Between a rock and a hard place. Doesn’t matter, so he shouldn’t feel too guilty. Everything is on tape, usually from one more than one angle…. I watched most of it.

At this moment, Officer Rolfe is being judged by a JURY OF HIS PEERS, and they find him not guilty.

Candace Owens tweeted a day or two ago she’d be trying to set up a fund for Rolfe, but so far, I don’t see it done.

Virtue signaling has its cost, as the Mayor and D.A. are now finding out. Interesting that the officer attended boocoo (sp???) descalation, etc., training, and got an award from Mothers Against Drunk Driving….

If what he did was wrong, the law in wrong, and so are the policy makers. Presumably the city council, mayor and police chief.

Having watched the tape, I found the length of time the officer took to run the sobriety test took a long time. I didn’t like that. But it’s not a criminal offense to be slow.

Anyway, I live near Atlanta and am driving in tomorrow for an errand. Hope all is peachy.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Close The Fed. | June 17, 2020 at 10:13 pm

    I don’t think there’s a time limit on a sobriety test. It’s important to have clear evidence, and you can take as long as you like to get that as far as I know.

      CKYoung in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 17, 2020 at 10:53 pm

      Healthguyfsu, Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST’s) can be extremely accurate in determining if a subject is under the influence. They are not pass/fail. Cues are observed and based on the cues, a trained officer can be up to 95% accurate in determining a BAC of .10% if a three battery test is used (horizontal gaze nystagmus, walk and turn, and one leg stand). Dropping the foot to the ground during one leg stand is a cue for example. Then a preliminary alcohol screening device may be used to confirm/deny an officer’s observations. Tests are explained/demonstrated then administered if the subject says they understand the instructions. There are pre-FST questions to determine if there are possible factors to consider while observing the subjects performance (medical, physical problems etc.) There are many, many factors that can effect how long the process takes. Officer safety is generally first and foremost in the field. Also generally speaking, reducing exposure time is considered prudent, either get the subject on his/her way expeditiously, or in custody, but with the requisite evidence to make the arrest. You are correct, there is no actual time limit, it is (supposed) to be controlled and determined by the officer.

        rightway in reply to CKYoung. | June 18, 2020 at 12:57 am

        I use to prosecute DUIIs. I went out a couple of times with my best DUII cop. I was floored at how accurate his guesses were. Mixing drugs and booze complicated things. Made me feel a LOT better about prosecuting DUIIs when they refused to blow.

          CKYoung in reply to rightway. | June 18, 2020 at 2:45 am

          rightway, those “guesses” were probably based on the three test battery, which when done correctly is extremely accurate. If the impairment was greater than what HGN indicated, next cause almost always drugs. The Drug Recognition Evaluation program is also now extremely accurate.

    (sp??) – since you asked – it is beaucoup – or a lot based on my HS French class.

    By the way, you did a good job on the “sounds like” level per this link – 😉

    oldgoat36 in reply to Close The Fed. | June 17, 2020 at 11:40 pm

    It’s one thing for this DA who drummed up these racially based charges against the officer to claim the one officer will testify against the other. It is not like he has to prove it.

    It’s the claim so he can insert guilt of Rolf by making it seem like the other officer knows Rolf acted in premeditated fashion. This is race baiting and sowing seeds for riots to break out when Rolf is acquitted.

    This is purely for the left goal of pushing race wars before the election.

    With the officers walking off the job as they are, it shows they know the charges are political hand grenades against the police.

    Sanddog in reply to Close The Fed. | June 18, 2020 at 2:17 am

    Brosnan’s lawyer says there’s no plea deal and he is not going to testify against Rolfe.

I have a great amount of respect for the APD officers. They may be saving the country with this very courageous action.

Atlanta has long been an anomaly within the state of Georgia. Since the 1970s there have been two distinct parts of Georgia, Atlanta and the rest of the state. Now, Atlanta’s population is over 50% Black. And, virtually the entire elected leadership of Atlanta is Black.

LE, in this country, has been very patient and understanding, over the last few weeks. But, the point has been reached where LEOs are not going to take it anymore. This is just the beginning. Large cities can not exist without strong law enforcement agencies. Not oppressive LE, but strong LE. For the last 20 years, our society had been kicking cops around and blaming them for all the ills imposed by liberal wienies. And, the cops are no longer going to sacrifice themselves for people who will not support them.

Good luck,

    Grrr8 American in reply to Mac45. | June 18, 2020 at 8:48 am

    Not “our society” dumping on law enforcement.

    We are a divided country: Progressives on one side, and Pro-Americans on the other.

    They can’t be reconciled because Progressives hate America as founded, and intend to “fundamentally transform” it into a Collectivist model (I’d say a fusion of Socialism and Fascism).

    It is the Progressives that have been dumping on law enforcement.

      Sorry, but it is OUR society. The non-Progressivees in this country could have stood up to the Progressive takeover of this nation much, much sooner than they did. Progressivism has been around since the late 1880s, 150 years. It has always been a product of the upper class and exists solely to benefit that class by controlling the lower classes. It was not until 2015, that any concerted effort was made to push back against the elite establishment by the common people. The result is an all-out assault on the rest of society by the Elite Establishment using the lower economic classes, iof all things. Unfortunately, it my be too late to save our society, as we know it.

The DA didn’t even wait for the GBI to complete their investigation. That was a huge, huge mistake. It’s highly likely GBI is going to rule this a justified use of force. If that happens, the DA’s case is sunk and Atlanta will burn. If the officer is acquitted, Atlanta will likely burn. It’s likely no APD officer will use any level of force from this day forward, Atlanta will likely burn. Lose/lose/lose. I think that’s by design, by the way. I don’t think this strategy is going to work out for them, however. Among the huge problems in the latest press conference, the DA minimized the Taser as threat, yet two weeks ago said a Taser was a deadly weapon. I wonder if he plans on claiming the video of him saying that is a “deep fake,” or if he is really that arrogant (or maybe not smart?) Either way, the guy really did a lot of damage to his prospects on this case.

    navyvet in reply to CKYoung. | June 17, 2020 at 11:25 pm

    The normal course of action is an investigation (in this case, by the GBI) and the results of that investigation are presented to the DA.

    The DA then impanels a grand jury, to which the facts of the case are presented. The grand jury then — after due deliberation — either returns an indictment, or a “no bill”, meaning no charges are proffered.

    This is what happens when a community is ruled by law.

    In Atlanta, (and unfortunately, some other places) there is apparently a different process that is not ruled by law.

    IMHO, the Atlanta DA should be immediately terminated.

      Sanddog in reply to navyvet. | June 18, 2020 at 2:21 am

      The voters may do that on their own. Or not. Howard is under a criminal investigation by the GBI. This may be his way of sticking it to them and placating the left wing.

If you go to “” which is a scanner web page and then tune in Atlanta PD then all you get is a lot of silence. Good. Let those racist politicians find out what the world is like without cops.

    Pelatiah Adams in reply to Jasonn. | June 18, 2020 at 8:18 am

    Thanks for the info. I’m listening now. Silence. Cobb officers still working though. I’m hoping Atlanta’s loss will be Cobb’s gain. (suburban county nw of ATL).

Conservative Beaner | June 17, 2020 at 10:18 pm

If this goes south Sherman’s march to the sea will look like a backyard cookout.

    amatuerwrangler in reply to Conservative Beaner. | June 17, 2020 at 11:41 pm

    You beat me to it, your rascal. 🙂 [see above- 11:26pm]

      thetaqjr in reply to amatuerwrangler. | June 18, 2020 at 4:25 am

      When a commenter beats you to posting a right ignorant remark, you should give thanks and maintain silence after the fact, not join in in celebrating the ignorance, making the ignorance a twofold affair. Egad.

        Barry in reply to thetaqjr. | June 18, 2020 at 11:21 am

        Oh, look, the marxist chinaman shows up again.

        The marxist would prefer we use tanks to crush the citizens that desire freedom.

I was talking about this case with a former MP friend. His view was that the officers did not say the magic words of “you are under arrest”. Of course, they said something similar, but not exact. And that’s why the officer is being charged as a CYA for the city of Atlanta.

He thinks the DA made the charges to try to keep Atlanta “calm” over the next few weeks. And then hope no one follows what happens in a year or so.

    CKYoung in reply to Liz. | June 17, 2020 at 11:24 pm

    That’s a myth. Same with the myth that a subject is required to be Mirandized simply as a function of arrest. The Fulton County DA did not do himself any favors today in that press conference, I think he damaged himself and the case badly, maybe fatally, actually.

    Milhouse in reply to Liz. | June 18, 2020 at 12:30 am

    There are no magic words.

    Just as there are no magic words when Congress declares war. Back during the Iraq war many people made fools of themselves by insisting that since the congressional resolution authorizing it had not contained the magic words “We Declare War” there was no state of war and the president was somehow violating the constitution. It was BS.

    Not only is an AUMF all the authority a president needs to go to war, a state of war can exist even without any declaration at all. If the other side is shooting at us, we’re at war. That’s why it was so important when GWB went on TV the evening of Sep-11-2001 and formally recognized that the USA was at war, not only with those directly involved in that day’s attacks, but with the entire terrorist network of which they were part. The later AUMF only served to ratify that announcement.

      CKYoung in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 12:37 am

      “You’re under arrest” all the way to “Eat these nukes” covers a lot of ground, but I do appreciate the principle Milhouse. Some situations are so obvious to all involved, no specific articulation is necessary.

      Aarradin in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 1:23 am

      Has someone hijacked your account, M?

      Last three posts I’ve seen from you were actually sane.

      daniel_ream in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 2:25 am

      Milhouse, I’m wondering if you can illuminate something for me. I don’t know anything about Georgia state DUI law, but my understanding of the situation is that the police were summoned by Wendy’s employees because Brooks was passed out drunk in his car.

      Okay – he’s on private property, and in the video he doesn’t seem to be indicating that he’s going to presently drive on to the road. So where does all this DUI come into play? It’s not illegal to be drunk in your car on private property, even someone else’s. Trespassing, sure, Wendy’s didn’t want him there. But the rest of the situation seems based on police overreach from the beginning.

        if the police find you in the driver’s seat, parked or moving, the assumption is you drove it. in this case the first cop that woke brooks, found him behind the wheel with the engine running.
        because brooks fought with the police, the DUI isn’t even required.
        he assaulted police, resisted arrest, fled from police, stole city property and threatened police and bystanders.

          But all that came after and as a result of their decision to arrest him for DUI.

          My understanding is that at first they just wanted him to move his car out of the drive-through lane and to a parking spot, where he could sleep it off. Then Rolfe smelled his breath and decided to test him and then breathalyze him, and then to arrest him for having been in charge of a car while intoxicated. If he was still very drunk when the cops came, imagine how drunk he must have been when he drove to the Wendy’s, stopped in the drive-through lane, and instead of placing an order fell asleep.

          I think that was a mistaken decision. Brooks was harming nobody, and there was no reason to arrest him. If they didn’t want him possibly deciding to drive away, there was a simple solution. He had already offered to leave the car in the parking lot and walk to his sister’s house to sleep it off. If they didn’t want him driving even the short distance to a parking spot, they could have moved it themselves, as they ended up having to do anyway.

          But once he had fought the police, resisted arrest, and fled with a weapon in his hands, he had to be caught. I wonder, though, whether that should have changed once he discharged the taser. It seems to me that at that point, with a no-longer-useful weapon in his hands, he no longer posed a threat to the public so under Tennessee v Garner it was no longer lawful to use lethal force to stop him fleeing. But it’s a lot to expect Rolfe to have made that calculation in the moment, right after Brooks had fired at him.

          drednicolson in reply to [email protected]. | June 18, 2020 at 3:48 am

          If he’d cooperated and not tried to escape the officers’ lawful detainment, he’d have spent the night in the precinct’s drunk tank instead of in the morgue.

          That down thumb was a fat finger, not an actual disapproval.

          Chewbacca in reply to [email protected]. | June 18, 2020 at 6:01 am

          Millhouse, so arresting a drunk driver is a mistake? They should have just let them go because he hadn’t killed anyone before he was caught? That’s some of the most ridiculous stuff I’ve heard.

          Milhouse, one could also make an argument that a drunk uninhibited individual who has just brawled with the police and fired a now defunct taser is still a danger to others. Is physical force using your hands and feet no longer physical force?

          NavyMustang in reply to [email protected]. | June 18, 2020 at 8:08 am

          The kicker is that he was asleep in the driver’s seat with the ENGINE RUNNING.

          If the car had been off, there would have been no case or a very sketchy one at best.

          Yes, Chewbacca, there was no need to arrest him. He wasn’t driving and wasn’t about to drive. He was technically in charge of his vehicle, but not in a way that endangered anyone.

          rdm, objectively if he was no longer armed he was not a danger to anyone. There was no reason to suppose that he would attack any member of the public. He had no reason to. He was just going to find somewhere to hide, and to sleep off his drunk. But my main point is that there was no reason for any of this to have happened in the first place. The initial mistake was the decision to arrest him, which was a discretionary decision. Rolfe could have decided to let him go, and probably should have. Then nobody would have been in danger.

          daniel_ream in reply to [email protected]. | June 18, 2020 at 10:08 am

          This is what I’m trying to get my head around. Suppose I get falling-down drunk in my own kitchen, stumble out the back door, get into my car, and tear around my own property for a while without entering a public road.

          Have I committed a crime?

          Suppose I get falling-down drunk in my buddy’s kitchen, stumble out the back door, get into my car, and tear around his property for a while without entering a public road.

          Have I committed a crime?

          “…and tear around my own property for a while without entering a public road.”

          Well, unless you own a Wendy’s with a public parking/drive through, your safe.

          He was in what is known as “constructive possession. Being behind the wheel of a motor vehicle, while intoxicated, especially if the vehicle engine can be easily started or it is running, constitutes PC for a DUI arrest.

          There are two problems with not arresting a person, under such circumstances. The first is that there s nothing to stop him from returning to the vehicle starting it up and driving off, becoming a danger toi himself and others. People have access to spare keys and the vehicle can not be legally impounded unless an arrest is made. So, the LEO and his agency face huge liabilities for not enforcing the law, as written. The second problem is that the man is intoxicated to the point where the LEO feels he can not safely operate a motor vehicle. If they allow him to leave and he is injured or killed, as a result of his intoxication, they face the same liability. Society has placed LE in a catch 22 situation, where they literally have to arrest a person where probable cause exists for DUI.

          The thug killed in Atlanta was on parole and a DUI conviction would have sent him back to prison.

          Did you read about his rap sheet?

          Media Portrays Rayshard Brooks As Loving Father Despite Criminal Charges Of Cruelty To Children, Battery On Family Member, False Imprisonment

          Milhouse: he was still armed. How was he no longer armed?

        ConradCA in reply to daniel_ream. | June 18, 2020 at 5:42 pm

        I think that if a parking lot or driveway is open to the public for driving then normal laws about driving apply.

        CKYoung in reply to daniel_ream. | June 19, 2020 at 3:34 am

        In California a Peace Officer may make a warrant-less arrest for DUI even if no driving was observed. Peace Officers can arrest for DUI on private property as well. While there is great discretion for Peace Officers in enforcement action, some Departments make DUI investigations resulting in an officer’s opinion the individual was under the influence at the time of driving a SHALL arrest. Failure to do so could lead to disciplinary action up to termination.

      Terence G. Gain in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 6:36 am


      Unfortunately GWB went to war against the truth when he declared that Islam is peace. Black Lives Matter has declared war on the truth with its charges of systemic racism. If America is racist then why are Indo-Americans the highest income earners per capita?

      I have heard two black female lawyers describe the justifiable killing of Brooks as: “they killed a man because he fell asleep in his car”. On Hannity last night, Geraldo Rivera said “Brooks went to Wendy’s for a hamburger and got killed.” These are gross and irresponsible lies land it is disturbing that lthey are spoken by lawyers who are more devoted to their tribe then they are to their profession and the rule of law and indeed the necessity for truth and reason.

      The truth is that Brooks resisted arrest, assaulted and overpowered two police officers, grabbed the Taser of one of the officers, started to run, and then fired the Taser at Garret Rolfe at close range. In a split second reaction, Rolfe then shot Brooks. If he had had time to reflect upon what he was doing perhaps he would not have shot Brooks but the suggestion that he is guilty of a crime, especially murder, is odious. The suggestion that Rolfe should simply have let Brooks flea is absurd. Brooks was in possession of a deadly weapon which he had used. It would have been irresponsible to allow him to flee.

      This is in effect a political trial and the conduct of the DA is disgraceful. America will continue to descend into darkness until the false narrative of Black Lives Matter is thoroughly rebutted.

      I am hoping that reason and common sense will prevail and that Garrett Rolfe will be acquitted of all charges. I think that the likely outcome is a hung jury.

      I fully support Professor Jacobson for having the wisdom and courage to challenge the false narrative of BLM. Crimes statistics demonstrate that the narrative of BLM is false.

The DA is a clown either trying to save his job in the runoff or set up an impossible situation for his successor.

As to the blue flu, hey we are in a global pandemic! Shame on anyone who exerts their privilege to judge these officers. You don’t know their individual or collective lived experience.

You obviously need to attend reeducation camp where you will be forced to be silent and listen to their stories and their demands.

SeekingRationalThought | June 17, 2020 at 10:37 pm

I’m keeping an open mind on the officer’s actions, but the DA’s actions, lies, hypocrisy and alleged personal corruption are making it more difficult. As is the use of grand jury warrants without a grand jury and filing charges before the state investigation is completed. This is beginning to look like a bunch of weak politicians, themselves accused of incompetence and corruption, throwing a young cop under the bus in order to save their failing careers. Rather than living up to their oaths and responsibilities, they are happy to use a tragedy involving a black citizen and white cop to distract from their own failings. Given the situation, anyone of good faith, has to question this prosecution

    I don’t know. They may not care at all of Atlanta burns, so long as they stay on top. The politicians in Detroit have done well by themselves despite running city at near 3rd world levels of failure. It’s not like the looters will ever hit their place.

As much as I feel badly about the people who need to have the police respond to their calls, I don’t think I don’t think that anything short of this will cause the folks who have caved – including some who just hate the police to begin with – to BLM to rethink their positions. City “leader” along with seemingly half the country have just rolled over and caved to the mob. It’s amazing to see how many truly spineless people there are in this country.

    amatuerwrangler in reply to jepcop. | June 17, 2020 at 11:51 pm

    For most of us it has been too damn easy. Yes, us, as in my 75 years my dues have been relatively low. However,I had elders who made it clear that this didn’t “just happen”.

    It is not a real surprise a lot of our kid’s generation have taken the ride for granted. People who own their home (solo or in partnership with the bank) tend to appreciate it and take better care of it than those given housing (think housing authority).

The first deadly weapon Brooks picked up that evening was his car keys. DUI cases are made by the totality of the circumstances and not solely on the results of the field sobriety exercises. Most impaired persons cooperate right up until they realize they aren’t going home and Brooks had other motivation to not go to jail, so I have one more test, bend over at the waist and try to touch your palms together…..

healthguyfsu | June 17, 2020 at 11:44 pm

So, when do we get those peace officers from Demolition Man? Be well, John Spartan!

Over at my place, when there is a problem and the Police don’t come…
We don’t wait on Judge and Jury.

I keep hearing people on tv say, well they should have let him go, maybe have a family member pick him up instead of arresting him for DUI.
MADD and other groups have been advocating for decades to get those people off the road, I checked their twitter feed and have heard nothing and have not heard any of their spokespeople on tv.
The fought for years to get .10 down to .08, their silence in this case is telling.

On another front, his family and legal team won’t even acknowledge he has a police record and spent time in the lockup and was on probation.

    Sanddog in reply to buck61. | June 18, 2020 at 2:24 am

    He was so incapacitated, he thought he was in a neighboring county. He had no idea he was in Atlanta.

Also waiting for tox screen. Falling asleep on “one drink”…I bet more than alcohol. Note… drunks tell you that had less than they had while druggies tell you more especially if opiates.

Even a fleeting glance back and pointing taser is grounds for shooting. Three shots fired… better than average shooting. Charging directly without full evidence… no due process.

    dmi60ex in reply to alaskabob. | June 18, 2020 at 8:25 am quite possible the officer shot in reaction to Brooks motion to fire and not the actual firing of the taser ?
    It was pretty quick.
    He may have not processed that the taser missed.
    There is also a question of whether the stolen taser was one shot or two.shot taser and whether he was aware of such.
    The info I read was that his taser was two shot and those were already spent previously.

    He claims one drink. I’m pretty sure a breathalyzer doesn’t blow a .108 for cocaine or marijuana.

There comes a time when a breaking point is reached. A time when you stand and say this far but no further.

There is nothing wrong with initiating an investigation into the shooting. Any shooting should be investigated and to my knowledge that is always the case in police shootings, regardless of circumstances.

To charge the officer with all Howard did, without the investigation being completed, with no input from the investigating team, it moved this into full political theater, where the DA pronounced the officer to be guilty of cold blooded murder. This is a hate crime, a racist crime committed by the DA for his political reasons.

The police have seen with this racist motivated move by the DA that every single one of them are at risk of being charged with murder for any of the calls they go out on, regardless of facts or situation, for racist BLM purposes. They can stay on the job and could be facing similar charges should they encounter a bad situation which endangers their lives.

The left seems to think they can threaten, destroy lives, and the victims of their criminal actions will just keep taking it. The police have been killed, hurt and charged with serious crimes. Now we hear defund the police, which includes placing the officers not only in danger of prosecution of murder in racial cases but also open to law suits that would target their personal assets in courts which have a much lower level of reasonable doubt required.

Why would you stay with those risks, despite the pay being decent, when you are putting your life on the line every single call? Is making $100K a year worth dying for? Is risking your life and now your families lives worth it for a city which makes you out to be the criminal?

This hate the police movement began in earnest under Obama. He pushed racial issues to be worse than decades before. It is by design. Once some cities see police officers leaving en mass, others will follow over taking the risks they have to take.

TheOldZombie | June 18, 2020 at 12:13 am

The prosecutor said a taser is not a deadly weapon.

Two weeks ago the same prosecutor said this: “A taser is considered a deadly weapon under Georgia law” (this was when he charged the six officers for assaulting the college kids in their car)

Link to where he says it:

I don’t think the GBI is going to find that this is anything but justified. The case will collapse.

    healthguyfsu in reply to TheOldZombie. | June 18, 2020 at 12:54 am

    I’m not sure the prosecutor’s uninformed opinion on either is worth that much to either condemn or absolve anyone. It’s not like he’s an expert.

Gone With the Wind, as they say.

A taser is not a non-lethal weapon, it is a less-lethal weapon.

But I have a question. As I understand it, once a taser has been fired it is no longer a threat to anyone else until the cartridge has been replaced. If Rolfe had a moment to think about it, surely he should have realized that Brooks had fired the taser and was therefore now effectively unarmed, which meant he was no longer a threat to him or to the public, and therefore the fleeing felon rule was no longer in effect. Have I missed something?

    amatuerwrangler in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 12:48 am

    Update! fleeing felon rule has been mitigated and restricted into almost nothing… it started its erosion maybe 30 years ago…

    However, APD has 2-shot tasers, as well as seperate contact application. Brooks still had one pop left when he continued his flight.

      Milhouse in reply to amatuerwrangler. | June 18, 2020 at 3:51 am

      The fleeing felon rule is still in effect, if and only if the felon poses a threat to the public. All the Supreme Court did in Tennessee v Garner was take notice that when the rule evolved felonies were capital crimes, so it was reasonable to assume that any felon on the loose was a threat to the public. Nowadays most felonies are not that serious, and don’t make someone a threat, so they modified the rule accordingly.

      Note, by the way, that the decision was based on the fourth amendment, so it’s limited to state actors. The common-law rule used to apply to everyone, not just cops. Most if not all states have by law limited it to cops, but if any state has not done so then in that state the full original rule still applies to non-state actors.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 12:51 am

    Through his lawyer, he heard a bang and saw a flash of light. I think that’s a reasonable position considering the immediate circumstances.

      healthguyfsu in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 18, 2020 at 12:56 am

      One of those circumstances may be that due to the suspect’s body position he couldn’t clearly see what kind of weapon was being fired at him just that something with noise and flare (like muzzle flash) was being fired.

      I’m no self defense expert, but I don’t think it is required that civilian or LEO assess the model of a firearm being fired at them before defending themselves.

    TheOldZombie in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 12:57 am

    I don’t know what taser version Atlanta PD carry but there are tasers being carried by police departments that fire two shots before needing to be reloaded. The second shot is in case the first one fails.

    Also the tasers record everything so the GBI will know when the taser was fired.

    CKYoung in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 1:55 am

    .31 second decision for you to make Milhouse. DUI suspect running away from you. Did he already have a gun in his waistband with a light on the picatinny rail? Did he grab said weapon once he broke free? Ever hear the “pop” of a Taser Milhouse? Why are police trained to yell “Taser Taser Tassr” before discharging a Taser? (sympathetic fire). Taser X2 has two cartridges, but can also be used in the ‘drive stun’ mode which can have detrimental physical effects on the receiver of the drive stun, resulting in physical advantage over the receiver. If a criminal gets physical advantage over the receiver (an armed officer), the criminal might have a better chance of taking the officers firearm, exponentially increasing the risk to all involved. In one of the videos, it appears a cartridge was deployed by the fleeing felon (light glinting off the taser dart cords). To me, it appeared the darts were directed very closely to the officers head (officers are trained NOT to discharge Tasers at a suspects head). If you were an officer in this situation, not knowing in the heat of the moment if one or two cartridges were deployed, would you assume the risk of taking a Taser dart in your eyeball or eyeballs, being permanently blinded by this fleeing felon? Would you stop chasing this guy, knowing he could use this Taser to do a carjacking? Discharge it at some 19 year old beloved daughter, permanently blinding her? Putting a dart in her spinal cord? Would the suspect kick her out of the car at 120 miles per hour while fleeing in a reckless manner? Look up where in this post I first wrote MILHOUSE. Your time to decide all of this had already expired before you got there.

      Milhouse in reply to CKYoung. | June 18, 2020 at 3:53 am

      That’s why I wrote “If Rolfe had a moment to think about it”. He obviously didn’t, and did the best he could in the circumstances.

      GWB in reply to CKYoung. | June 18, 2020 at 10:41 am

      Did he already have a gun in his waistband with a light on the picatinny rail?
      Sorry, but they had already searched him. If he had a pistol in his pants, then they did a piss poor job of patting him down.

      I’m certainly not rushing to judge the cop, but that particular argument doesn’t work here.

        Barry in reply to GWB. | June 18, 2020 at 11:42 am

        This is true.

        OTOH, even police officers are not immune to the effects of adrenalin and the impact it has on your defensive mechanisms. When a fleeing suspect turns and fires a weapon, even a cap gun, your reaction is defensive, not trying to recall how well you searched the suspect, or did he acquire a more deadly weapon in the struggle.

        CKYoung in reply to GWB. | June 18, 2020 at 11:48 am

        This is why the courts are not to second guess officers in use of force cases. Did the officer think: “Sh!+, I must have missed that gun during my search?” Is that a reasonable thought to have as the officer sees a light and heard a ‘pop?’ I suggest if this thought flashed through the officer’s mind, and the officer balanced that thought against the thought of never returning home to see his family, it is not only a reasonable thought but a reasonable reaction to his thought and observations. The bottom line is we can’t re-live the moment in the officers shoes, and we can’t apply “what if…” I suggest to anyone who thinks these life and death decisions are easy to seek out some type of use of force training scenario/s. Simunitions are good because getting hit by them can be painful. Although not actual life/death, they can reveal a lot about a person’s own thought process and reactions to various use of force scenarios.

    Voyager in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 3:05 am

    The part you are missing is the “moment to think about it”.

    Once you are in armed conflict, and someone points what could be a weapon at you, you are going to act entirely on reflexes, or not at all. Either you will reflexively counter the perceived threat, before it has processed to the fore-brain, or you won’t do anything in the time it takes the other guy to act.

    There is simply not time to do otherwise.

      Milhouse in reply to Voyager. | June 18, 2020 at 3:55 am

      I didn’t miss it at all. That’s why I wrote “If Rolfe had a moment to think about it”. He obviously didn’t have that moment.

      drednicolson in reply to Voyager. | June 18, 2020 at 4:18 am

      Hence why LEOs and soldiers undergo training. It’s to “reprogram” their reflexes so they can effectually respond to imminent threats. Neutralize threat NOW, ask questions later.

      F*ing around with a cop is like teasing a mousetrap. A 9mm mousetrap. The training WILL take over.

    rdm in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 6:05 am

    Depends on the Taser. There are two shot tasers and some police departments do use them. I don’t know if Atlanta is one of them though.

      dmi60ex in reply to rdm. | June 18, 2020 at 8:34 am

      Info I read Rolfe was two shot and was spent the stolen one was the other officerd.
      I don’t believe they were partners because only one observed and dealt with him in the drive thru.
      Rolfe may have had no idea what Brooks had
      possession of.

        Barry in reply to dmi60ex. | June 18, 2020 at 11:44 am

        “Rolfe may have had no idea what Brooks had
        possession of.”

        I’m pretty sure we’ll find that is the case.

    Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 12:15 pm

    It depends upon the specific model of taser. Some tasers have a single dart cartridge, while others have double dart cartridges. I do not know which model the police had, in this instance. However, when the cartridge is discharged, this is done with gunpowder charge, just like a projectile pistol.

    So, imagine yourself chasing a person through a parking lot, at night. You know that he stole a taser, but have not searched him for other weapons and do not know, for sure, if he has your partner’s firearm. He suddenly turns and points a pistol shaped object at you and it discharges, with a bang and puff of smoke. What would the reaction if a reasonable LEO be, under those circumstances? Most likely to assume thaat the weapon being fired was a handgun and return fire.

Got LEOs in the family. Believe me when I say all cops nationwide are paying attention to what is happening in Atlanta.They don’t get the stories like this one on the news, they share them through forums, emails and texts. Right now there are a lot of discussions going on in homes along the lines of, “How soon can we retire?” “Where can we go that’s safer?”. Small municipalities and rural areas are becoming mighty attractive to the wives – and any place away from blue states.

There is a reign of terror sweeping across the nation.

AG Barr is….asleep.

    AG Barr ought to be asleep. It’s one o’clock in the morning.

    I’ll know it’s a Reign of Terror when I read the antifas have sent strongbacked BLM lookalikes to Atlanta, carted you off to Seattle in a tumbril, dumped you out, and guillotined your young ass on tv for msnbc viewers.

    Even Sherman’s march to Savannah did not approach what Robespierre did to the citroens Napoleon was about to tyrrannize.

    Some of y’all will say anything for a joke, I guess.

      Barry in reply to thetaqjr. | June 18, 2020 at 11:46 am

      The marxist chinaman lives in a nation run by terrorists.

      Just ask the kids in Hong Kong, Taiwan, or Tiananmen Square.

When things go to h… I wonder if Colon Powell, James “mad” Mattis and their never trumper retired general buddies are going to oppose deploying federal troops from Ft (named after a confederate so I can’t use it).

    Davod1 in reply to rightway. | June 18, 2020 at 6:22 pm

    Thank heaven you didn’t write Fort Hood. Otherwise, we might not have had the benefit of seeing your comments.

The department investigating the incident has not completed its investigation, and gave a press release stating that they were not consulted prior to the DA’s press conference where the charges were not announced. They also dispute several statements made by the DA at that press conference.

Used to be, you’d get limited duty while the investigation took place. In a case like this, clearly simple defense, it would quickly conclude and pass its findings on to the DA. The DA would review the case also, and again: in a case like this would find that any officer in that situation would reasonably believe their life was in danger and fire. No charges would be filed, and that would be the end of it.

Now, the mob riots and burns, and beats people on the streets. The officer is immediately fired, and the next day a whole raft of criminal charges are filed against him by the DA before the investigation has come anywhere near reaching a conclusion.

When this goes to trial, what are the odds this officer gets a fair trial? Zero. Any BLM supporter on that jury will vote to convict, their mind is already made up and the facts don’t matter. Hopefully, in Georgia, the officer will have an option of a bench trial, but even then – if the judge is an ideological supporter of BLM, zero chance of a fair trial.

    Milhouse in reply to Aarradin. | June 18, 2020 at 3:59 am

    Honest juries still exist. His chance of getting one is well above zero. I think above 50%.

      rdm in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 6:07 am

      What are the chances of one that isn’t intimidated into doing what the mob wants regardless?

        Milhouse in reply to rdm. | June 18, 2020 at 9:22 am

        As I said, honest juries still exist. Honest juries are those who do their duty regardless of any other consideration. Fiat justitia incendent civitatem.

          Anacleto Mitraglia in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 11:19 am

          I have two latin sentences that I find more apt for the occasion:
          Fiat iustitia, pereat mundus.
          Summus jus, summa iniuria.

      Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 12:22 pm

      Okay, remember that this is Atlanta. This is a classic case where a change of venue is not only permissible but necessary. So, go outside the Atlanta area and this guy likely gets acquitted in record time. Georgia and Atlanta are two very distinct entities.

    VaGentleman in reply to Aarradin. | June 18, 2020 at 9:27 am

    Many thought that Zimmerman couldn’t get a fair trial, but he did. If the trial was held today, the mob will rule, BUT the trial won’t happen for at least a year. And, there’s always the Freddie Gray strategy – a bench trial. It worked for them too.

    Unfortunately, as we saw with Zimmerman, it won’t undo the harm done to the officers by the rush to judgement.

Peaceful protest. Time for block parties.

Anacleto Mitraglia | June 18, 2020 at 2:40 am

Still, I have a question, for anybody that wants to answer. It’s not rhetoric, it’s not sarcastic: it’s just a legal question. Suppose I’m sleeping in my car, someone summons the police, they come and find I’m intoxicated. Ok, not good, but why should they arrest me? What’s my crime? It is certainly NOT drunk driving, if I sleep it’s precisely because I don’t want to DUI. Since drinking is not a crime either, is it forbidden to sleep in one’s own car?

    Given that he is the only one in the car, and the area he is stopped at is not an area that sells alcohol, he’s of a reasonable suspicion of either driving while drunk, or at a minimum, driving to a location and getting drunk in the car.

    Further, since he was stopped in the middle of a drive through, it is unlikely that someone who was sober would have parked there to drink.

    Basically under those circumstances, it is reasonable for the police to arrest and charge you with DUI. Also note, charging someone with a crime is not the same as convicting them of a crime, and does not require the same standard of evidence.

    Bruce Hayden in reply to Anacleto Mitraglia. | June 18, 2020 at 3:45 am

    In some states, apparently the standard is whether the driver is behind the wheel. If he is in the back seat, then he isn’t in control of the vehicle. Of course, if he admits to having driven there, that might be different. Maybe, depending on how long he has been there. My understanding is that BAC rises after drinking for a short while, then starts to decline, until all of the alcohol in your system is metabolized. So, mere presence in, say, the back seat drunk, may not be sufficient to prove DUI – for example, he may have driven up before the alcohol hits, climbed in back, and then had the full extent of the alcohol hit. Which is why it is easier to prove DUI if he is sitting in the driver’s seat, as was the case here. It didn’t help matters that he drove up and passed out in the drive through lane. That would probably, with the smell of alcohol, probably be sufficient for probable cause for arrest for DUI. even before the roadside sobriety test, which he apparently failed.

      healthguyfsu in reply to Bruce Hayden. | June 18, 2020 at 3:51 am

      In my state of VA it is behind the wheel with keys in ignition and car running.

      Can be in park but you are still breaking the law at that point.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Anacleto Mitraglia. | June 18, 2020 at 3:53 am

    I don’t mean to offend you but this definitely sounds like a “wiggle out on a technicality” type question. Most DUI laws have been word to stop those loopholes precisely because of the well-documented dangers presented by a driver under the influence.

    So, to answer your question shortly, No…the crime is still DUI.

    If he had realized he was too drunk to drive and decided to sleep it off, he would have pulled over somewhere and turned off the engine. Maybe even climbed into the back seat so he could stretch out a bit. But at least pulled over and turned it off. And if he’d done that nobody would have called the police in the first place. The Wendy’s employees called the police because he had pulled into the drive-through lane, put the car in park, and fallen asleep with the engine running, presumably while waiting for someone to take his order.

    Did you carry the car there on your back? Did you park the car at the Wendy’s drive through then get drunk afterwards?

      Anacleto Mitraglia in reply to rdm. | June 18, 2020 at 8:54 am

      Thank you all, I’m a bit more informed now. Of course my question was in general, not specifically aimed at this incident. And no, I don’t drink & drive.

    Whether you’ll get charged with drunk driving for being asleep in the car depends on the circumstances – where the car is, whether you have the keys, if you’re in the front seat, etc.

    If the car is in a parking spot and you gave a friend the keys after getting into the car (maybe you’ll walk home in the morning) you’re legally safe. Keys in your pocket and you’re in the back seat of the car, nearly as good.

    If you’re sleeping in the driver’s seat, with the engine running, and the car is at a stoplight, or in a drive-through lane, the fact that you put the car in park before falling asleep won’t save you from a DUI conviction.

      GWB in reply to ecreegan. | June 18, 2020 at 10:35 am

      One other concern: the attitude of the cop and of you.

      As a practical matter, sitting somewhere – even with the engine running so you don’t roast/freeze – drunk could be a No Big Deal. Or it could be a life-as-you-know-it-ender. A great deal depends on whether the cop is in the mood (permanent or temporary) to give you credit for trying to not DUI or not. And, of course, your attitude could certainly induce a temporary mood in the police officer to have zero tolerance.

      None of that is intended to blame the victim or excuse bad behavior by police. Just a point to not forget the human factor in all this.

does anyone know why the police can’t go on strike like every other union (public employees and private business) ??
are their only options to resign or call out sick?

    Police strikes are illegal everywhere I’ve ever heard of.

      Anacleto Mitraglia in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2020 at 9:03 am

      Strikes were illegal also in English textile factories and coal mines of XIX century, but the workers went on strike however. And rightly so. It depends, I guess, on how many people do it. You can fire and prosecute a 10% of the body, not a 90% (in NYC, for example, it would be tens of thousands of people).

    Generally speaking, strikes by public employees are generally illegal. They are particularly illegal in the case of “first responders” – police, firemen, ambulance drivers (public ones), etc.

    So, the police unions find ways to strike without actually calling for a strike. Who’s to say they didn’t all simultaneously come down with Wuhan Flu and need to quarantine for 2 weeks?

    One thing I’m unsure of: who pays if there is an actual strike? Do they bust the union? Fire the cops? Both? Something else?

      GWB in reply to GWB. | June 18, 2020 at 10:26 am

      Generally speaking, strikes by public employees are generally illegal.
      Brought to you by the Bureau Of Redundancy Department.

    Police strikes are illegal. But, the walk-out has to be planned and only the organizers of the walk-out are usually criminally or civilly punished. You will notice that the collective bargaining unit, for the APD rank and file, is disavowing all knowledge iof this sick-out/walk-out.

      Voyager in reply to Mac45. | June 18, 2020 at 10:16 pm

      Well, given that this started only hours after the DA announced charges, I actually believe the Police Union in this one. It does not look like there was time to organize it. I think this is far more a case of officers deciding the risks just are not worth it any more.

      If the DA is going to try to send you to the chair for not getting murdered, it is just not worth it. Better to just get fired for cause and go do something where your boss is not trying to get you killed on a routine basis.

    ‘Striking against the public interest’. I’d imagine it would be in theory much the same as the air traffic controlled business.

Anacleto Mitraglia; At a minimum, after failing a field sobriety test and then a breathalizer, I would think public intoxication. Keep in mind it was Wendy’s staff that called the police because he was passed out and blocking traffic. They did not want him there as evidence by their 911 call.

There is a concerted effort to discourage people from becoming Law Enforcement Officers. Years of a near perfect record can be wiped out, and serious incarceration be imposed, caused, in a split second, by reactions to the lawless actions of hoodlums.

“First-degree criminal damage to property” is a strange charge to tack on. What property would that be? “Multiple counts of aggravated assault” is also strange. I’ve never heard of charges like that when there is only a single alleged victim and a short, continuous chain of events. You normally need multiple victims, or have the assaults clearly distanced by time. What is the DA doing, counting each alleged blow as a separate charge?

I once had a fellow work for me that I tasked with a job. I tried to teach him the job, but he refused because he already knew everything he had to do. Needless to say, the fellow failed spectacularly which was an extreme embarrassment to him such that he almost quit out of shame. The next time a similar issue came up, he was in my office begging me for instruction and guidance.
The reason I bring this up is that there is a very large number of people who are incapable of learning from either reading, being instructed, or anything else. They are so fixed in their ego driven viewpoint that they believe they know everything. Any effort to teach these people anything will not only fail, but will result in a backlash of some sort. The only way these people will learn is to let them do it their own way and watch them fail. The greater and more public the failure, the more they will learn.
In our current climate, the Left is driving so many false theories about not needing the police, about racism with the police, how police are hunting/targeting blacks to kill, etc. They are creating an impossible environment while refusing to see the important function of the police. Well, this is their chance to learn by having the police walk off the job. There is simply no other way for these idiot politicians and activists to learn. When this fails spectacularly (hopefully with no deaths), then the public will be forced to take action by demanding their leaders adopt a mature role in governing. Perhaps the police will start being better treated and the public understand the role of policing better.

    Paul in reply to Cleetus. | June 18, 2020 at 8:15 am

    The lessons you’re talking about will take generations to learn, and in the process many more cities will wind up like Baltimore, Detroit, etc. Leftism is disease.

I live in NE Atlanta. You couldn’t pay me enough to go into the city after dark. My observations:
First doctored video was released showing white cop unloading on black guy and then multiple other videos were released by the people in the drivethru that showed series of events. Somehow bodycam video was also released in the ongoing investigation that discounted first videos. FYI: Cop was hit in arm with one lead of the taser.
Mayor KLB ignored APD protocol and encouraged city council to fire cop before internal GBI investigation was complete. She also called cop a murderer in front of reporters.
Police Chief quit.
Lame Duck DA filed 11 charges before internal GBI investigation was complete. One of those was murder.
In an early statement Mayor KLB said a taser in the hands of a cop was a deadly weapon. KLB latter stated the taser in the hands of a black man was non-life threatening.

KLB has stirred the race war pot and stoked the fire where her actions will do more damage to Atlanta than Sherman’s army did. ATL cops know they do not have upper management support and will be thrown to the wolves. Police officers eligible to retire are dropping their packages to make it happen. Every county outside the ATL beltway is being flooded with applications in the local PD’s and sheriff’s offices. Only fools travel into the city unarmed.

    GWB in reply to Tsquared. | June 18, 2020 at 10:19 am

    She also called cop a murderer in front of reporters.
    Which, when he is acquitted (likely, given the over-charging), will lead to the lawsuit for slander, I hope.

One thing you can be certain of … The results will be ” unexpected “

I believe that the current rule for arrest is
It is not based on the content of your character but on the color of your skin.

Mayor Steve Benjamin of Columbia, SC sure got preferential treatment by the CPD after he plowed into a car at 5am the morning following his election win. Google it.

VaGentleman | June 18, 2020 at 9:17 am

If this is leading to police reforms, let’s make sure asset forfeiture, no knock warrants, 4th amendment protections, etc are all included in whatever passes.
Blacks aren’t the only ones unhappy with the current state of affairs.

felony murder
This one is egregious. It’s probably the main reason cops are going Galt.

multiple counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon
Can you legally count each shot fired as a separate count? That seems… unjust.

And, sadly, once again, I have to wonder if the over-charging isn’t to ensure an acquittal and, therefore, more riots. Especially if you can get him a speedy trial – one that concludes in late October….

Many comments urging alternative to arresting Brooks, some here many more from tv talking heads.

Could the cops have had Brooks call an Uber or a friend to drive him home? Maybe, but there are a couple of issues the proponents of that are skipping.

1. What is the law in GA?
2. What is the department policy for Atlanta PD?
3. Who is going to tell MADD about this change?
4. Has the legislature of GA adopted the change?
5. Do the voters in GA know and have they agreed?

If you can’t answer those questions completely and comprehensively then why are you demanding that the Atlanta PD
follow some policy preference that you are retroactively seeking to impose?

We have elections. These produce the members of the legislature, who then create and amend the laws. PD then adjust their policies and training in conformity with the new political policy preferences. Individual LEO do not and should not do anything other than follow department policy and training.

The bottom line is that if we as a society insist that certain actions be criminalized, DUI, as one example then to expect that the PD won’t enforce the laws we demanded is folly. IMO, we have far too many criminal statutes but until they are revoked we should insist they be enforced without regard to whom is the offender.

    TX-rifraph in reply to CommoChief. | June 18, 2020 at 11:41 am

    Yes. Many people seem to think DUI/DWI is a victimless crime. I think unnecessary deaths from DUI/DWI have run around 2o,000 – 25,000 per year for decades. Many people do not realize that the drunk can escape a friend’s car or an Uber a block away and be back driving before the Police report is filed. Some drunks get violent (men and women). Blame the courts and the legislators for this mess. The cops seem to be the only one’s trying to make the cities safe.

I don’t understand why there is a cop left in uniform in the US. I guess the ones who simply have no other prospects for employment.

Of those, how many are going to be willing to take calls?

Why would they? When they know, for a fact, that even if they do their job well, if they have to use force against a black person, they’re going to be thrown under the bus.

They’re going to be arrested, charged and thrown in jail for doing their job.

Sorry, but no amount of money, no job security, no benefits are worth that risk.

I actually applied for a police position with one of the local departments after I retired from the military. I didn’t get it. I assume because I’m too pale and too male. Damn I’m glad I dodged that bullet now. I may not have a cushy double-dip retirement to look forward to, but when I do my job I get raises and promotions and bonuses, not arrested.

texansamurai | June 18, 2020 at 2:44 pm

I don’t understand why there is a cop left in uniform in the US. I guess the ones who simply have no other prospects for employment.

because they care–because they are called to the job–we are lucky to have such men and women

I am shocked that Governor Abrams has not taken a position on this yet, or is she waiting to do it as VP?

Paul Howard is the Marilyn Mosby of Atlanta and it’s going to end the same way.
Inflamed nation? Let’s throw gasoline on it.
We are seeing a disgusting true-colors moment of all the “elites” of society – media, academia, government. And if it all falls apart I want to see them at the front lines – where the punches are thrown and the bullets are shot.

What caused the unfortunate death at Wendy’s was actually an institutional problem that no one seems to address. The problem is how police agencies use statistics (arrests, DUIs, etc) to evaluate their officers.

I’ve personally handled at least 6 calls similar to this one. In most cases, it’s a person who worked hard all day, had a few beers, and went to their car to sleep it off. This case is a little different because of the drive-thru, but it’s not hard to see how it should have been handled:

1. Check the driver to see if he’s OK.
2. Run the plate and OLN to see if clear and valid.
If clear and valid, and the subject said he wanted to walk home,
3. Give the subject my business card and tell him to walk home and pick up his keys and license tomorrow at the Sgts desk.
4. Ask the manager where the car would be OK, put the car there, and leave a note on it: Do Not Tow.
5. Back on the radio, “Officer handled. I’m in service.”
6. After shift, drop the license and keys off at the Sgts desk with a short Speed Report.

This handling would ensure public safety, making sure the possibly drunk person didn’t drive. It would be a relatively favorable encounter for the subject, and would quickly solve the problem for the restaurant. It would ensure good PR with any onlookers. It wouldn’t require calling backup, or being out of service for 2-3 hours to process a DUI. Ten minutes, and I’m on the next call.

Why don’t officers do this? Because they’re evaluated on the number of arrests they make, DUIs they process, and number of citations they write. I worked for a Sheriff who would come out and talk to citizens to evaluate us. Our orders were to keep bad things from happening in our area.

Our priorities were: 1. Public safety; 2. Education of the public; and 3. Everyone abiding by the law. If we had a month with no fatalities, no serious injuries, no felonies committed, no arrests, and few citations, that was considered a good month. But our statistics would look like we didn’t do anything, and in most big departments it would get you placed on probation.

    PRNeoCon in reply to OldProf2. | June 19, 2020 at 4:05 am

    What happens the next night when he falls a sleep crosses the median and kills a family of five. That’s why you arrest him to make the streets safer. Perhaps, if he kills someone later on , you’d agree to take his place in jail or bring someone’s loved one back. But glad you saved all that time on duty. How many of the 6 people you let off drive drunk again?