Bad Boys II

[Dill]

(06-26-2020, 12:13 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Dill Wrote: So you are explaining your "mistake" with reference to the character of Fulton County DA, not your understanding of how Federal/Georgia law might or should apply to the circumstances of Brooks' shooting? 
If the problem is really the DA's character and not your understanding of the law, then I'd like to know why you assumed that shooting a fleeing, unarmed suspect in the back should lead to dismissal of charges against Rolfe and reinstatement of his job.
The DA wrong, why?  And please, not just some impressions. If you are not "wholly ignorant in this subject," identify the legal precedents which should govern the shooting of Brooks and the firing of Rolfe, and his  subsequent arrest.
Then explain how or where the DA has has applied the law "fraudulently."

The DA charged officers who used a taser against two college students with a charge that requires a deadly weapon to be used to incur.  It's not that complicated, if your'e not a simpleton.  

That's a very off-center response. In the case I am referring to, a deadly weapon is used and results in a death.

You haven't answered any of my above questions.  You've not identified a single legal precedent at play in the Brooks' case nor explained it's application.

I'm sure it's not that complicated "if you're not a simpleton."  But demonstrating superior knowledge is better than just claiming it, isn't it?   

Why should a cop who shoots a fleeing suspect in the back not only avoid charges but get his job back after suspension--assuming the DA is not "a fraud"? How should a DA align that behavior with the law?