Garret Rolfe is a political prisoner

I wish there was a way to link to a radio program.  Mike Imprevento has just given a detailed explanation of how the shooting of Rayshard Brooks was both legal under Georgia law and protected as self defense under the Constitution.

Prosecutor Paul Howard has to know this but has charged the officer for political purposes.

If this goes on, there will be no need to defund the police, there won’t be anyone willing to take the job.

9 thoughts on “Garret Rolfe is a political prisoner

  1. “Prosecutor Paul Howard has to know this but has charged the officer for political purposes.”

    You know this to be true how?

    Mr. Imprevento is a defense attorney. It is his job to defend a client. If he were to take on this case as Mr. Rolfe’s attorney, he could argue his case in court. But because he is not there, he exercises his First Amendment rights by offering his OPINION on the case. Not speaking to the validity of his opinion, but it is his and not that of the DA in Georgia.

    Let the prosecutors and the defense attorneys do their jobs and not attempt to try the case in public forums.

    There are currently a lot more questions than answers. Is a taser a lethal weapon? Is a man running away from police ON FOOT a threat to public safety? Did the police already have his information so that he could be found at home at a later time?

    Not all police violence is unnecessary. However, how they react in situations, including possibly kicking a man when he is, literally, down, or standing on his back AFTER he had been shot, is something we should wonder about.

    Like

    1. As I wrote, I wish we could post a link to a radio program.

      The Prosecutor is up for reelection and is in trouble on character issues. He is clearly pandering to the mob. There was no grand jury, he did not wait for the police report from internal affairs. It was clearly a political move.

      Imprevento cited GA law, A taser is considered a lethal weapon, the reasoning being that once you have been incapacitated by the Taser, you are unable to defend yourself against further, lethal, attack.

      Holding someone in jail for a year waiting for trial on a charge that cannot be reasonably proven is extrajudicial punishment. Imagine being falsely accused, imprisoned for a year with no income, losing everything you own as well as your liberty and being at risk of fatal attack in jail when the prosecutor knows he is going to lose in court all along.

      The Atlanta police would be fully justified in refusing to take any risk on the job and watching the city burn.

      Like

      1. “Holding someone in jail for a year waiting for trial on a charge that cannot be reasonably proven is extrajudicial punishment. Imagine being falsely accused, imprisoned for a year with no income, losing everything you own as well as your liberty and being at risk of fatal attack in jail when the prosecutor knows he is going to lose in court all along.”

        That is the unfortunate reality for lots of folks arrested by police when there are few if any witnesses or recordings of the incidents. Poor people can languish in jail because they have no attorney and the jurisdiction is too poor to have public defenders in sufficient quantity and quality.

        If there is a miscarriage of justice in this case, it will come to light. Not that such is excusable just because the police have railroaded people in the past.

        The irony is there, though not pleasant for the alleged perpetrator.

        If taser is considered a lethal weapon because it incapacitates a person from defending himself, they so is a pocket pepper spray, a baton, a fist, a foot, tossing sand in the eyes, a cup of oil on the floor, etc. I think that GA law is either more complicated than that or it is full of poop.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Take it up with Imprevento. He’s the one who researched Georgia law on the subject, and it makes perfect sense to me.

          In your example, the police have the authority to use force to gain compliance, you and I do not.

          Like

          1. …”the police have the authority to use force to gain compliance”…

            Explain the need for use of lethal force in the case I cited. You can’t because there was no threat to the life of the officers or to the public in general.

            Like

    2. Trying cases in the public forum is a long standing tradition of liberals just like what the DA is doing right now. Bypassing all standard judicial processes and going straight to charges just in time for elections doesn’t make you go hmmm?

      Like

  2. RE: “If this goes on, there will be no need to defund the police, there won’t be anyone willing to take the job.”

    Leaving aside the possibility that that’s a feature, not a bug, I’d have to agree. Maybe we should call Ghostbusters.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s