Let's Start A Riot?!?!

it's not "semantics"

"Broken" means it's an accident. It's not. If you think it's "fixable" you don't get upset, you just accept that it happens. This is the problem. There's a distinct difference.

As far as the cop, he shot and hit bystanders cars. he's ***.

Shooting a tazer at a cop should not get bullets fired back. Tazer is one shot and not lethal, so..... Yea, emptying your clip in response to a tazer, is severely overboard.

You don't follow the courts much, then. And that's not a statement on the quality of these charges, just saying that prosecutors get up to hinky *** all the time. Nothing they do should surprise anyone. And I linked that article above; it's truly wild, but as others have said, it's not really anything we shouldn't expect at this point.

I had Bloomberg Shill ready to go but I gotta fix the Lodestone parser (and that moment has passed anyway).

The charges are completely legitimate, he shot 3 rounds, 2 into Brooks' back and one into an occupied vehicle. He then walked over to Brooks and said "I got him," kicked Brooks, while the other cop stood on his shoulder. Then instead of rendering first aid immediately, they waited for over 2 minutes before finally deciding to help the dying man. The ex-cop is facing a lengthy prison sentence, especially with the other cop giving statements against him.

You should back read a page.

Not that it matters, he said she said, everyone seems to think they know what happened. But they don't.

Why? Its not like Hideka has accurately reported on any facets of this case. The DA has actual eyewitnesses, photos, and 7 videos, as well as the 3 victims that were in the car that the cop shot. Thats a crime in itself right there.

Also, how about an actual update on the shooter in New Mexico?

DA brings more charges against New Mexico shooter


This is why we don't listen to Twitter warriors. I wonder if shoving those women to the ground made that guy feel tough?

i dare you to point out one thing ive said in relation to either shooting that was factually incorrect at the time that i made the statement. whats that? you cant? i should go read another video you say?

You do not understand the mentality.

They are not human they are libtards. Might makes right. Guns = more might.

Here's the thing.... Minds are made up, one side will view 'facts' and interpret them one way, someone else will draw different conclusions from the same 'facts'.

It's not hard to mold the story to fit an agenda. Whatever agenda. But the really awefull thing about humans, we dismiss each other and anything that doesn't fit the approved narrative.

Close mindedness along the lines of "why should I?" Pretty much impossible to overcome, neither of you know what happened, both of you have 'sources' that fit your narrative. The reality probably lies somewhere in between those lines.

Btw YOU SHOULD, because otherwise the ***cycle will still spin.

The entirety of your posts have been based on assumptions that you were making. You have never at any point had all the facts, yet you have posted as if you did, even laughably trying to use caps lock and bold text to try to make your assumptions more legit, a tactic that never works. As recently as trying to deny the ex-cop kicked Brooks, when the DA presented a clear photograph. Its no surprise that the actual detectives debunked your entire armchair analyses.

It's pretty cut and dried.

Officer has on vest, taser is completely ineffective, shot backwards, even if it did connect. (There was no aiming)

Georgia law states you cannot fire upon someone fleeing. Period.

Officer dipshit shot at civilians, while breaking the law shooting someone fleeing.

There is nothing open to interpretation.

I think he will plead down, obviously Georgia is different, they charged him with felony murder instead of 2nd degree murder, so I'm not sure what a lower charge would be. I'm sure it would still be a felony that wouldn't come with the death penalty.

oh do you mean THIS photograph? you know, the one with the officer NOT kicking him? the blurry *** picture through someones side view mirror? yea. looks like hes kicking him doesnt it?



just kidding. Look at where the officers right foot is. How many people do you think would try to kick someone like this behind them? He literally could not kick him from where he is standing. Think im making it up? you can even tell that hes not in a position to kick the man from where his shadow is. the entirety of his shadow is on the other side of the suspect. it doesnt cross the suspects body at all - this is physically impossible if he was in a position to kick this man. it would either be behind the suspect entirely, or overlapping the suspect depending on where the light is coming from. whats more- if he DID kick him, you could see it on the OTHER officers body camera - the one that was looking DIRECTLY at him when this was alleged to have occured. but you cant.

as for the other officer stepping on him? he absolutely did. the officer with a concussion, who got his head brutally slammed into the pavement by this wifebeating child abusing kidnapper. oh did i forget to mention that? yea forgot to mention my hunch was right. he was a Covid 19 early release serving seven years in prison for beating his wife and children, and kidnapping his child from the mother who had sole custody of the children.

Just for clarification, can you quote the law? I’m convinced this doesn’t apply if the suspect is firing a lethal weapon while fleeing (which I’m aware was not the case in this instance).

specifically at a federal and state level, both provide provisions for a suspect shooting while fleeing. this went through the SC back in the 80s and they found that a person is not fleeing if they are attacking someone in that flight, and that an officer has the right to shoot a suspect they believe will harm themselves or others.

There he goes again with those assumptions and lolhunches that don't actually have any affect on reality. But this is some quality arm chair detective make believe. I mean it should be obvious to everyone that your lifting these photos and arguments from some *** Twitter feed.

oh god, the sweet *** release of this, you have no idea how cathartic it is for me to put your foot into your own mouth again like this.



please, i need more.

Except I didn't, its a photo of Rolfe kicking him. Later the other cop is standing on him, two crimes. Whatever website you lifted that photoshop job from I'm sure tried to make the same "analysis" you did. It doesn't change anything. I mean its funny, the hoops that armchair detectives are trying to jump through to try to acquit this guy, and you bringing their arguments here, but its not going to affect reality.

WAIT, SOMEONE PHOTOSHOPPED THE LIVE VIDEO? WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN? IS IT LIKE THOSE MYTHICAL VIDEO READING SKILLS IVE HEARD ABOUT???

oh and here's his criminal history btw. TL/DR: Guy goes to prison for 7 for fencing and other charges. He Gets early release that next year for some reason. Within six months of probation, he beats his wife, children, kidnaps the child and beats a bystander at some point, and then gets his sentence bumped to twenty years. Lucks out in year seven and gets an early release for covid with probation.


This is why the dude lost his ***- he was on a one way ticket to another thirteen years in jail without possibility of parole.

Just like George Floyd, criminal history means nothing. None of it will factor into the conviction of Brooks.

Seize the Moment!!

still waiting to hear about how to photoshop live video - please id love to have that skill.

Oh hey deflection, what's up.

Seems like we have a bunch of first hand witnesses up in here.

I know this may be a stretch, and yes, shooting a person with a firearm when they are only pointing an inaccurate tazer at you should get you some prison time.

Here is something that the video nor any person that was there can confirm nor deny.

You think maybe in the heat of the moment he thought it was a gun? OMGERD /mindblown

Sheeples, the lot of you.

Uh, no? Not even the defense would try that argument. They had already checked him for weapons, he had none, it was his partners taser. No way the ex cop thought it was a gun.

So... in the heat of the moment, partner is... idk busy, he instantly knew he was drawing his partner's Tazer, not his partner's pistol.... ok gotcha.

Failing pretty hard at your critical thinking skills.