Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Discussion of current events
User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:20 am

neverfail wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 3:02 pm
cassowary wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 5:57 am
Neverfail,

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.
I stand by the evidence in the form of the video of the incident.
So do I. It happened so fast - maybe 2 or 3 seconds. I don't think that is sufficient for premeditation.
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.
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.
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 to understand how you could be so damned biased that you ignore the evidence staring you in the face.
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.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2659
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by Milo » Tue Jun 23, 2020 6:33 am


User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Tue Jun 23, 2020 7:16 pm

Milo wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 6:33 am
The left has shifted the goal posts. Before America can’t have a black President because it is racist. Now that we have had a black President, America is racist because some people fly the confederate flag or have statues of Lincoln.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2659
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by Milo » Tue Jun 23, 2020 8:08 pm

cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 7:16 pm
Milo wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 6:33 am
The left has shifted the goal posts. Before America can’t have a black President because it is racist. Now that we have had a black President, America is racist because some people fly the confederate flag or have statues of Lincoln.
Your sequitur could not be more non.

neverfail
Posts: 5453
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by neverfail » Tue Jun 23, 2020 10:34 pm

I stand by the evidence in the form of the video of the incident.
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:20 am
So do I. It happened so fast - maybe 2 or 3 seconds. I don't think that is sufficient for premeditation.
Garrett Rolfe was NOT defending himself against attack by Rayshard Brooks. He did not draw his service side arm 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.

Cassowary,

I will concede here that I made a poor choice of wording in using the word '"premeditated". "Uncalled for" would have more accurately expressed what I was trying to say.

Rolfe's action might have been (as you allege) a spontaneous an attack/assault on Brooks; just as the latter's gesture of raising the taser in self-defence was. Given that a police side-arm when fired accurately can ALWAYS kill its victim (unlike an inaccurately aimed taser by a desperate man on the run) I can only conclude that Rolfe's crime was a spontaneous (rather than a premeditated) criminal act of murder.

Race hatred on the part of the cop? I do not indend to pre-judge the man.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:58 pm

neverfail wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 10:34 pm
I stand by the evidence in the form of the video of the incident.
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:20 am
So do I. It happened so fast - maybe 2 or 3 seconds. I don't think that is sufficient for premeditation.
Garrett Rolfe was NOT defending himself against attack by Rayshard Brooks. He did not draw his service side arm 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.

Cassowary,

I will concede here that I made a poor choice of wording in using the word '"premeditated". "Uncalled for" would have more accurately expressed what I was trying to say.

Rolfe's action might have been (as you allege) a spontaneous an attack/assault on Brooks; just as the latter's gesture of raising the taser in self-defence was. Given that a police side-arm when fired accurately can ALWAYS kill its victim (unlike an inaccurately aimed taser by a desperate man on the run) I can only conclude that Rolfe's crime was a spontaneous (rather than a premeditated) criminal act of murder.

Race hatred on the part of the cop? I do not indend to pre-judge the man.
I agree with you reassessment. It was not premeditated. Rolfe could be guilty of an offence lighter than premeditated murder. It depends on Georgia law which I know nothing. There is no evidence of racism either.

At worst Rolfe acted out of instinct without thinking. There was no time to think. What sort of offence this is, if any, I do not know. Manslaughter?

Also we are making judgements in the calm atmosphere of our homes. We have plenty of time to think. Rolfe has to make a snap decision in the face of danger.

..........................................

By the way, a pistol does not always kill. Many people have survived a gunshot wound. Eg Ronald Reagan .

But I agree a gun is more lethal than a taser. That does not rule out the inadmissibility of shooting him. A knife or a sword is not as lethal as a gun. But I have read of a policeman shooting someone armed with a knife or sword without a public outcry. Eg the Attack on London Bridge by a radical Islamist.

It all depends on whether the policeman believes his life or that of bystanders are endangered to prove self defence and of course on whether the jury believes him.
The Imp :D

neverfail
Posts: 5453
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by neverfail » Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:02 pm

cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:58 pm

But I agree a gun is more lethal than a taser. That does not rule out the inadmissibility of shooting him. A knife or a sword is not as lethal as a gun. But I have read of a policeman shooting someone armed with a knife or sword without a public outcry. Eg the Attack on London Bridge by a radical Islamist.
Along with defending himself when under attack a policeman has a duty to protect members of the public when threatened with death - as with the London Bridge incident. If killing the attacker is unavoidable then so be it.

But ex-cop Garrett Rolfe were NOT in a situation even remotely like that. The miscreant was NOT attacking either of them (nor endangering bistanders in the vicinity) when Rolfe pulled his service pistol but was instead running away attempting to escape. So what? Would it not have been better to let him go rather than extinguish his life?

"It all happened within seconds" you say (as if that automatically justified the act)?? Have you ever heard of self-control Cassowary? Not letting your excitement run away with you?

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am

neverfail wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:02 pm
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:58 pm

But I agree a gun is more lethal than a taser. That does not rule out the inadmissibility of shooting him. A knife or a sword is not as lethal as a gun. But I have read of a policeman shooting someone armed with a knife or sword without a public outcry. Eg the Attack on London Bridge by a radical Islamist.
Along with defending himself when under attack a policeman has a duty to protect members of the public when threatened with death - as with the London Bridge incident. If killing the attacker is unavoidable then so be it.

But ex-cop Garrett Rolfe were NOT in a situation even remotely like that. The miscreant was NOT attacking either of them (nor endangering bistanders in the vicinity) when Rolfe pulled his service pistol but was instead running away attempting to escape. So what? Would it not have been better to let him go rather than extinguish his life?

"It all happened within seconds" you say (as if that automatically justified the act)?? Have you ever heard of self-control Cassowary? Not letting your excitement run away with you?
Easy for you to say. If you were in his situation, you might have done the same. Brooks fired his stolen taser, which as I pointed out, sometimes do kill. What if Rolfe was hit and stunned unconscious? It is possible, Brooks might have stolen his revolver and shot him.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2659
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by Milo » Thu Jun 25, 2020 1:16 pm

cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:02 pm
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:58 pm

But I agree a gun is more lethal than a taser. That does not rule out the inadmissibility of shooting him. A knife or a sword is not as lethal as a gun. But I have read of a policeman shooting someone armed with a knife or sword without a public outcry. Eg the Attack on London Bridge by a radical Islamist.
Along with defending himself when under attack a policeman has a duty to protect members of the public when threatened with death - as with the London Bridge incident. If killing the attacker is unavoidable then so be it.

But ex-cop Garrett Rolfe were NOT in a situation even remotely like that. The miscreant was NOT attacking either of them (nor endangering bistanders in the vicinity) when Rolfe pulled his service pistol but was instead running away attempting to escape. So what? Would it not have been better to let him go rather than extinguish his life?

"It all happened within seconds" you say (as if that automatically justified the act)?? Have you ever heard of self-control Cassowary? Not letting your excitement run away with you?
Easy for you to say. If you were in his situation, you might have done the same. Brooks fired his stolen taser, which as I pointed out, sometimes do kill. What if Rolfe was hit and stunned unconscious? It is possible, Brooks might have stolen his revolver and shot him.
With another officer standing right there?

neverfail
Posts: 5453
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by neverfail » Thu Jun 25, 2020 5:09 pm

cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am
Brooks fired his stolen taser,....
Yes he did - a wild warning shot (keep away from me!) when he was on the run. Not an aggressive, well aimed gunshot while in pursuit like that of police officer Rolfe.

It makes a difference.

Post Reply