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.
The guy in the video, John, is articulate with his explanation and he cited GA law. You are the opposite
Really the only thing John said that was wrong was, he told him he was under arrest !!!
The cop didn't use those words but the words he did use Brooks understood quite well !!!
No doubt he knew he was under arrest !!! Put your hands behind your back isn't a question !!!
Really the only thing John said that was wrong was, he told him he was under arrest !!!
The cop didn't use those words but the words he did use Brooks understood quite well !!!
No doubt he knew he was under arrest !!! Put your hands behind your back isn't a question !!!
Yeah, cops telling you to place your hands behind your back is not to test your flexibility or to check out your deltoid muscles
A reasonable person should know that he is being detained or under arrest when cops told him to place his hands behind his back.
The guy in the video, John, is articulate with his explanation and he cited GA law. You are the opposite
I watched the video only once. Based on that video, here is what I saw:
The officer claimed he shot the suspect in self-defense because the suspect was shooting at him and he feared for his life. It was mentioned that the officer said they (he and his partner) did not know if the suspect had a gun. He saw a flash and heard a noise directed at him by the suspect. He took out his weapon and shot the suspect. I get the impression that the officer did not think the suspect was using the taser that he stole from them earlier.
Didn't he and his partner talk about the suspect taking their taser earlier? If it could be established that officer was aware that the weapon the suspect was using was the taser, not a gun, which is considered to be less-lethal or even non-lethal, then the question becomes: was a lethal response necessary?
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.
