Atlanta Police walkout

[Vol737]

Hope everyone is well armed because we will have to do the job ourselves.

‘You won’t need to abolish us – we won’t be around for it’: Why many police officers like me are quitting the force

 

[DancingOutlaw]

Don't need to defund the police if you charge the **** out of them every time they have physical contact with a suspect. They'll just leave voluntarily. Atlanta utopia inbound. Social workers to Zone 3 please!

 

[hog88]

Well, they're independent because they dont work in a criminal justice department? If you mean biased, there's no way to completely make sure anybody is completely bias free, including if you leave oversight in the hands of a police department or state bureau of investigation.

My issue with "oversight" boards/committees ect is they are almost always appointed by politicians or the people they are supposed to be overseeing. They inevitably appoint people who will see things the way they do so I have trouble believing their independence.

 

[Electric Orange]

 

[1972 Grad]

Hope everyone is well armed because we will have to do the job ourselves.

‘You won’t need to abolish us – we won’t be around for it’: Why many police officers like me are quitting the force

Good article. If I was a cop a week ago, I wouldn't be one now.

 

[clarksvol00]

My issue with "oversight" boards/committees ect is they are almost always appointed by politicians or the people they are supposed to be overseeing. They inevitably appoint people who will see things the way they do so I have trouble believing their independence.

You're right, but I think having these matters investigated primarily internally or by another law enforcement agency is like having the fox guard the hen house.

 

[Tennesseefan2019]

 

[Matt2496]

I used to mock the people who said that we are heading towards a Civil War. At this point, with everything that has transpired this year, for the first time in my life I think we may be heading towards a Civil War.

 

[hog88]

You're right, but I think having these matters investigated primarily internally or by another law enforcement agency is like having the fox guard the hen house.

Agreed, I just don't know how to go about it.

 

[Matt2496]

The fact you have a DA charging this police officer with a crime that could put him on death row, for shooting a violent felon trying to steal his weapon, is unbelievably disturbing. This attempt to appease the violent mob, is unbelievably disturbing.

What's gonna happen is that this cop will most likely "get off" due to this being an over charge. This will spark more violence and rioting. I hope that the law-abiding citizens in Atlanta are armed, because crap is about to hit the fan down there.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

The fact you have a DA charging this police officer with a crime that could put him on death row, for shooting a violent felon trying to steal his weapon, is unbelievably disturbing. This attempt to appease the violent mob, is unbelievably disturbing.

What's gonna happen is that this cop will most likely "get off" due to this being an over charge. This will spark more violence and rioting. I hope that the law-abiding citizens in Atlanta are armed, because crap is about to hit the fan down there.

This is appeasement and "sending a message" wrapped together. If cops quit they'll say good only racists would quit because of this. GBI hasn't even finished their investigation so what evidence are they using? Just the video? The DA said the other officer is a state's witness but his attorney said he hadn't agreed to that. If they botch this up it will only defer the riots until verdict time.

 

[Rickyvol77]

This is 80 % of my practice for the past 25 years. In a nutshell, QI means that to be sued personally, in his individual capacity, an officer must be shown to have violated the Constitution and that the right he violated was "clearly established" at the time. The theory is that we need officers to make decisions rapidly and there is usually not time to reflect and think everything through. They should not be personally held liable unless it is clear and obvious that what they are doing is unconstitutional.

Typically, that can be done in two ways: find a prior case decided on materially similar circumstances from either the US Supreme Court, the federal court of appeals in your jurisdiction, or your state supreme court, which decided that the same action was unconstitutional; or, show that it is so obviously wrong that no reasonable officer could believe it to be lawful.

The theory is that under either standard you are giving breathing room to the officer to use judgment and not fear getting sued if he turns out later to be wrong. He should be given fair notice of what the parameters are.

So take the Atlanta case. Now, that is within my federal experience because it is within the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is comprised of Florida, Georgia, and Alabama. The question is, where you are in process of arrest and the suspect punches you, fights with you, grabs your taser and runs, but then fires it at you as he runs, is it clearly unconstitutional to use deadly force?

The answer is a resounding NO. This is not simply shooting a non-violent immediate risk felon in the back as he runs, which is unconstitutional. This is shooting one who is running away but in that process is firing the taser at you. There will be no case on point on the issue, and so the issue will devolve to whether any reasonable officer could believe that to be lawful, and the answer to that question is clearly yes.

Bear in mind this has nothing to do with the criminal case. I think that is weak for a ton of reasons, but that's not my usual area. I'd be stunned if in the inevitable civil suit the officer did not get qualified immunity.

I agree, and also objectively reasonable is pretty obvious for this case as well except to those who have no understanding of case law

 

[Rickyvol77]

There are lots of lawyers out there. I don't see that all of them either have to go into criminal system or civil law. I'm sure there is room for criminal attorneys that sit on a civil branch of mediation that make weighted recommendations to the criminal/civil branches of the justice system.

The system already accepts testimony of expert witnesses. I'm sure there's room in the process for expert witnesses when it comes to the actions of police officers.

So we are going to hold a basic court case for 300,000 police calls a year?

 

[Rickyvol77]

Officers are sworn to uphold the law. That should include within their own ranks. Any officer willing to turn a blind eye to the misdeeds of fellow officers is complicit, and should not be on the job.

I agree 100%

 

[Orange_Crush]

Officers are sworn to uphold the law. That should include within their own ranks. Any officer willing to turn a blind eye to the misdeeds of fellow officers is complicit, and should not be on the job.

I agree. Either we all have to agree that this doesn't happen, or we have to entertain the option that there is SERIOUS danger of this bond being created, which would constitute systemic problems that have to be fixed.

My argument, as surprising as it will sound to some. hasn't been anti-law enforcement. My argument has been that I suspect there are inherent, systemic problems that naturally occur within the system we have instituted so the system needs to be redeigned or burned down and replaced.

Believe it or not, I understand and empathize with the natural and inherent parts of the job that could cause these issues. Think about it, though. That's what makes it so important to fix.

 

[ETV]

I used to mock the people who said that we are heading towards a Civil War. At this point, with everything that has transpired this year, for the first time in my life I think we may be heading towards a Civil War.

I'll have to disagree with you. There may be some civil unrest and incidents in cities with minimal to zero PD presence, but not an all out civil war with liberals and conservatives fighting it out in the streets.

Not gonna happen.

 

[Matt2496]

I'll have to disagree with you. There may be some civil unrest and incidents in cities with minimal to zero PD presence, but not an all out civil war with liberals and conservatives fighting it out in the streets.

Not gonna happen.

You're probably right. Still, seeing armed insurrections taking place and what's happening to this officer is pretty upsetting to me.

 

[1972 Grad]

I used to mock the people who said that we are heading towards a Civil War. At this point, with everything that has transpired this year, for the first time in my life I think we may be heading towards a Civil War.

Just need somebody to tell me who to shoot at.

 

[lawgator1]

Could the family win a suit against the PD? i have a feeling they would settle but assume they didnt settle.

There are two types of claims that can be made: 1) a state law tort claim, for battery or negligence, arguing that the City is liable for the acts of its officers; or 2) a civil rights claims in which they would have to show that a policy or custom of the police department caused this to happen.

The former is easy, but usually involves a cap on damages. The latter is tough to prove, very tough.

Regardless, the reality is that these cases tend to settle, especially when they have so much attention. There is value to the City and to the police department to having it closed and behind them.

 

[Roustabout]

I agree. Either we all have to agree that this doesn't happen, or we have to entertain the option that there is SERIOUS danger of this bond being created, which would constitute systemic problems that have to be fixed.

My argument, as surprising as it will sound to some. hasn't been anti-law enforcement. My argument has been that I suspect there are inherent, systemic problems that naturally occur within the system we have instituted so the system needs to be redeigned or burned down and replaced.

Believe it or not, I understand and empathize with the natural and inherent parts of the job that could cause these issues. Think about it, though. That's what makes it so important to fix.

I group up in Chattanooga and it has more problems than Knoxville. There are certain area la that if you enter your likelihood of being a victim of crime goes up exponentially. Now, for me, I can avoid those areas. For others that isn’t so easy. I’m all about ideas that will make those areas safer and lower police presence. To this point I haven’t seen any.

 

[Orange_Crush]

So we are going to hold a basic court case for 300,000 police calls a year?

I can be sued by anyone for anything. Get over it. The criminal justice system can ruin anyone's life for anything. You basically tell us to get over it.

DAs charge people every day with no intention to prosecute--often knowing they're innocent--in order to pressure them to give testimony about someone else. I spoke to a narc detective several years ago about a teen he arrested, knowing they were innocent, so he could pressure for testimony on the guy he was after. Laughed about it because (she'd guilty of something). Cost the family over 10 grand in attorney to get her out of it.

You guys use the system as a weighted boot against people every day, but you can cry me a river at the thought of getting sued for doing your job?

Keep crying and kick rocks.

 

[hog88]

Just need somebody to tell me who to shoot at.

Any guy wearing skinny jeans is fair game.

 

[FLVOL_79]

I used to mock the people who said that we are heading towards a Civil War. At this point, with everything that has transpired this year, for the first time in my life I think we may be heading towards a Civil War.

Good thing the majority of the military and civilian gun owners are right wing.

Well, not good if you're a lefty..

 

[1972 Grad]

Any guy wearing skinny jeans is fair game.

Huff and Dink seem like they might wear them.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Just need somebody to tell me who to shoot at.

Skinny jeans, man buns, men wearing capris, socks and sandals (sorry Grandpa), and anyone who wears a "virginity rocks" shirt.