So do I. It happened so fast - maybe 2 or 3 seconds. I don't think that is sufficient for premeditation.neverfail wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 3:02 pmI stand by the evidence in the form of the video of the incident.cassowary wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 5:57 amNeverfail,
I believe the ex cop stand a good chance of being found not guilty of all charges by simply pleading self defence. After checking, I found that the Taser can kill. According to Amnesty International , the taser had killed more than 300 people in the US.
So the ex-cop’s life was in danger albeit not as much as when faced with a gunman.
As I said, a taser can sometimes kill. When Brooks fired the taser, the thought entered Rolfe's mind to shoot him. The key question is whether a reasonable man in that situation feared for his life. It is for the prosecution to prove that Rolfe did not fear for his life. Firstly, the taser itself can kill. Secondly, even if it did not kill immediately, there is the possibility that taser could have taken his pistol and shot him or someone else.Garrett Rolfe was NOT defending himself against attack by Rayshard Brooks. He did not draw his service side are until after the latter had struggled himself free and was fleeing in blind fear (probably with reason). Instead the cop set out in pursuit of the fleeing Brooks and shot him down then - in my books that counts as a premeditated attack, not as self-defence. As for Brooks stolen taser he was shooting it wildly behind him while on the run from his pursuer - that counts physically as an act of defence.
If I know anything about The South: had Rayshard Brooks been a white motorist caught drunk and asleep blocking the exit lane from the fast food outlet pick-up window like that - the likely outcome might have been that cop Garrett Rolfe would have given him a stern warning and told him to drive his car over to a vacant parking space nearby and sleep it off - as worst having served him with a ticket with a fine attached if that is the penalty under Georgia law for a minor traffic infringement like that. The fact that Brooks was black likely prompted him and police colleague to choose the path of attempted arrest - unnecessary considering the softer alternative option rweadily available.
That's your bias. The south is no longer what it was during the days of segregation. It also cannot stand as evidence in a court of law.
I am at a loss at how someone is so ideologically biased as you to see that the evidence against Rolfe for premeditated murder is weak. Let's see what happens. You might be right. A lot depends on what Georgia state law and police departmental instructions to the law officers are regarding the use of lethal force by police officers.I am at a loss to understand how you could be so damned biased that you ignore the evidence staring you in the face.