Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Paul Howard is a Fulton County employee not a city of Atlanta employee. Despite that it is clear that Howard and Bottoms are in collusion on this case and are tied at the hip. It's too late for Bottoms to try and distance herself from Howard at this point it wouldn't make any sense they are both too far dug in at this point.
She's up for re-election next year. Her only hope is that Howard isn't re-elected this year, gets indicted/convicted of something and then she can claim ignorance of the situation.
And after Brooks fired that taser, in a manner that had little chance of hitting the officers anyway, he was effectively out of ammo. Yet Rolfe acted as if Brooks was a deadly threat after he fired the taser.
Seems that Brooks was not the only man on the scene that night who had no clue about the basics of tasers. Makes you wonder if all cops should be carrying them, let alone guns.
None of this matters. The Tasers are not single deployment Tasers the officer in a split second can't know if that was the first or second deployment of the Taser. The issue here is Paul Howard said that a Taser is a "deadly weapon" only two weeks ago but now all the sudden it isn't? It can't be both ways. Howard is going to have to make up his mind which I think the GBI will do for him when their report comes out and contradicts the many lies Howard told yesterday.
None of this matters. The Tasers are not single deployment Tasers the officer in a split second can't know if that was the first or second deployment of the Taser. The issue here is Paul Howard said that a Taser is a "deadly weapon" only two weeks ago but now all the sudden it isn't? It can't be both ways. Howard is going to have to make up his mind which I think the GBI will do for him when their report comes out and contradicts the many lies Howard told yesterday.
The GBI will be very clear and unambiguous I'm sure. They won't be under pressure to rush and substantiate any charges because Howard did it all by himself.
What is the general feeling on the district attorney? What was the feeling about him prior to these most recent incidents? I personally think that a taser is supposed to be a non-lethal weapon, as I do think the point of tasers and pepper spray are to provide officers with non-lethal means to subdue suspects so that they don't have to draw or use their firearm nearly as much. So, I think that the officer likely was negligent in firing at the suspect as he was fleeing.
However, there is one problem that I want to focus on. I am not an attorney, just a civilian and wanted to get the thoughts on posters here. So, the Atlanta metro area has had two recent high-profile cases: the Brooks' shooting and the tasing of the students/protesters that results in assault charges against multiple officers.
In the latter case, the officers involved in the tasing of the students were charged with aggravated assault by Howard's office. Howard's justification was that the taser was considered a deadly weapon. In the link below, he states "As many of you all know, under Georgia law, a taser is considered as a deadly weapon…”
So, let's fast forward to the Brooks case. If I were the defense attorney for either suspect, I would be using that clip and that case against Howard and the prosecutors in the Brooks case. Howard has not come out and stated anything about a taser being non-lethal or anything along those lines in the Brooks case but the charge itself basically suggests it. So, if I am the defense attorney, I would introduce Howard's statements on tasers from the student tasering case as evidence in the Brooks shooting case. I would point out that Howard made it clear that "a taser is considered a deadly weapon" under Georgia law. Therefore, if Mr. Brooks had a taser & fired a taser at a police officer, then he was in possession of a deadly weapon and had shown the willingness to use the deadly weapon on a police officer at the time that he was shot by my client, the defendent.
Now, as I stated above, I don't truly consider a taser as a deadly weapon because I do think the purpose of a taser is to give officers another non-lethal option for dealing with suspects. However, I do think Howard has really backed himself into a corner with his "a taser is consider a deadly weapon under Georgia law" stance in the student tasering case and that it could very well be used against him by the defendents in the Brooks case. Do you guys agree with me? Am I overlooking something here?
None of this matters. The Tasers are not single deployment Tasers the officer in a split second can't know if that was the first or second deployment of the Taser. The issue here is Paul Howard said that a Taser is a "deadly weapon" only two weeks ago but now all the sudden it isn't? It can't be both ways. Howard is going to have to make up his mind which I think the GBI will do for him when their report comes out and contradicts the many lies Howard told yesterday.
None of this matters. Howard clearly stated that Brooks' shot was the taser's second shot, which rendered it useless. If the officers can't even count to two, why in the world were they even on the police force in the first place? Maybe a job at an Amazon warehouse would have been more their style.
What is the general feeling on the district attorney? What was the feeling about him prior to these most recent incidents? I personally think that a taser is supposed to be a non-lethal weapon, as I do think the point of tasers and pepper spray are to provide officers with non-lethal means to subdue suspects so that they don't have to draw or use their firearm nearly as much. So, I think that the officer likely was negligent in firing at the suspect as he was fleeing.
However, there is one problem that I want to focus on. I am not an attorney, just a civilian and wanted to get the thoughts on posters here. So, the Atlanta metro area has had two recent high-profile cases: the Brooks' shooting and the tasing of the students/protesters that results in assault charges against multiple officers.
In the latter case, the officers involved in the tasing of the students were charged with aggravated assault by Howard's office. Howard's justification was that the taser was considered a deadly weapon. In the link below, he states "As many of you all know, under Georgia law, a taser is considered as a deadly weapon…”
So, let's fast forward to the Brooks case. If I were the defense attorney for either suspect, I would be using that clip and that case against Howard and the prosecutors in the Brooks case. Howard has not come out and stated anything about a taser being non-lethal or anything along those lines in the Brooks case but the charge itself basically suggests it. So, if I am the defense attorney, I would introduce Howard's statements on tasers from the student tasering case as evidence in the Brooks shooting case. I would point out that Howard made it clear that "a taser is considered a deadly weapon" under Georgia law. Therefore, if Mr. Brooks had a taser & fired a taser at a police officer, then he was in possession of a deadly weapon and had shown the willingness to use the deadly weapon on a police officer at the time that he was shot by my client, the defendent.
Now, as I stated above, I don't truly consider a taser as a deadly weapon because I do think the purpose of a taser is to give officers another non-lethal option for dealing with suspects. However, I do think Howard has really backed himself into a corner with his "a taser is consider a deadly weapon under Georgia law" stance in the student tasering case and that it could very well be used against him by the defendents in the Brooks case. Do you guys agree with me? Am I overlooking something here?
I agree 100%. And especially so since we're talking the same person saying different things 2 weeks apart. I'm sure the police officers' attorneys are already very aware of this. The more Howard speaks the more he contradicts himself. I wonder if he can be asked to take the stand?
What is the general feeling on the district attorney? What was the feeling about him prior to these most recent incidents? I personally think that a taser is supposed to be a non-lethal weapon, as I do think the point of tasers and pepper spray are to provide officers with non-lethal means to subdue suspects so that they don't have to draw or use their firearm nearly as much. So, I think that the officer likely was negligent in firing at the suspect as he was fleeing.
However, there is one problem that I want to focus on. I am not an attorney, just a civilian and wanted to get the thoughts on posters here. So, the Atlanta metro area has had two recent high-profile cases: the Brooks' shooting and the tasing of the students/protesters that results in assault charges against multiple officers.
In the latter case, the officers involved in the tasing of the students were charged with aggravated assault by Howard's office. Howard's justification was that the taser was considered a deadly weapon. In the link below, he states "As many of you all know, under Georgia law, a taser is considered as a deadly weapon…”
So, let's fast forward to the Brooks case. If I were the defense attorney for either suspect, I would be using that clip and that case against Howard and the prosecutors in the Brooks case. Howard has not come out and stated anything about a taser being non-lethal or anything along those lines in the Brooks case but the charge itself basically suggests it. So, if I am the defense attorney, I would introduce Howard's statements on tasers from the student tasering case as evidence in the Brooks shooting case. I would point out that Howard made it clear that "a taser is considered a deadly weapon" under Georgia law. Therefore, if Mr. Brooks had a taser & fired a taser at a police officer, then he was in possession of a deadly weapon and had shown the willingness to use the deadly weapon on a police officer at the time that he was shot by my client, the defendent.
Now, as I stated above, I don't truly consider a taser as a deadly weapon because I do think the purpose of a taser is to give officers another non-lethal option for dealing with suspects. However, I do think Howard has really backed himself into a corner with his "a taser is consider a deadly weapon under Georgia law" stance in the student tasering case and that it could very well be used against him by the defendents in the Brooks case. Do you guys agree with me? Am I overlooking something here?
As I said yesterday, the debate over whether the taser is a deadly weapon is moot.
If it is a deadly weapon, then Rolfe should have been much more careful about securing it before getting into a wrestling match with Brooks. If it was that easy to steal then it might have been that easy to fall out. Plus it's obvious from the bullet hole on the bystander's car that Rolfe, maybe Brosnan, was reckless with deadly weapons. Oh and let's not forget Rolfe's apparent inability to count to two like I described above.
If it's not a deadly weapon, then in theory this should be an open-and-shut case against Rolfe. In theory.
So I agree, I believe that Rolfe's attorney will use Howard's comment against him if the case does go to trial.
I agree 100%. And especially so since we're talking the same person saying different things 2 weeks apart. I'm sure the police officers' attorneys are already very aware of this. The more Howard speaks the more he contradicts himself. I wonder if he can be asked to take the stand?
Probably not, or he can decline if asked, seeing that SCOTUS just upheld qualified immunity this week.
None of this matters. Howard clearly stated that Brooks' shot was the taser's second shot, which rendered it useless. If the officers can't even count to two, why in the world were they even on the police force in the first place? Maybe a job at an Amazon warehouse would have been more their style.
There is no way for the officer to know in that situation if it is a first second or even third shot. Howard is contradicting himself on these two cases. It can't be both ways it is one or the other. Brooks resisted a lawful arrest and assaulted both police officers. He then proceeded to steal a "deadly weapon" (Paul Howard's words) and deployed that weapon at a police officer. He was then met with deadly force. Its unfortunate but that is how we got there. No amount of lies or mental gymnastics after the fact by Paul Howard is going to change any of that. Remember, there is 87 minutes of clear video of what did and did not happen. There is the Wendy's surveillance footage. This isn't a case of he said she said. We have the documented evidence of the incident from start to finish. Paul Howard can't change that.
There is no way for the officer to know in that situation if it is a first second or even third shot.
Really? An officer cannot be expected to perform the simple task of counting the shots of a one-at-a-time-shot taser? You do know how tasers work, right? You do know that those wires have to be completely retracted into the device before it can fire again even on full charge, right?
Quote:
Howard is contradicting himself on these two cases. It can't be both ways it is one or the other. Brooks resisted a lawful arrest and assaulted both police officers. He then proceeded to steal a "deadly weapon" (Paul Howard's words) and deployed that weapon at a police officer.
Highly debatable. And again, since Rolfe is apparently unable to count to two, he apparently did not know that Rolfe was effectively disarmed after firing.
Quote:
He was then met with deadly force. Its unfortunate but that is how we got there. No amount of lies or mental gymnastics after the fact by Paul Howard is going to change any of that. Remember, there is 87 minutes of clear video of what did and did not happen. There is the Wendy's surveillance footage. This isn't a case of he said she said. We have the documented evidence of the incident from start to finish. Paul Howard can't change that.
That's right, there are videos. Let's let all that evidence come out and see where the chips may fall.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
