Firing of Atlanta officer who shot Rayshard Brooks reversed

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: AP

ATLANTA (AP) — The firing of the former Atlanta police officer who's charged with murder in the shooting death of Rayshard Brooks has been reversed.

Garrett Rolfe was fired in June, a day after he shot Brooks in the parking lot of a fast food restaurant. The Atlanta Civil Service Board on Wednesday released its decision on Rolfe's appeal of his firing.

“Due to the City’s failure to comply with several provisions of the Code and the information received during witnesses’ testimony, the Board concludes the Appellant was not afforded his right to due process,” the board said in its decision, according to news outlets. “Therefore, the Board grants the Appeal of Garrett Rolfe and revokes his dismissal as an employee of the APD.”

Police responded June 12 to complaints that Brooks had fallen asleep in his car in the drive-thru lane of a Wendy’s restaurant. Police body camera video shows the 27-year-old Black man struggling with two white officers after they told him he’d had too much to drink to be driving and tried to arrest him. Brooks grabbed a Taser from one of the officers and fled, firing it at Rolfe as he ran. An autopsy found that Brooks was shot twice in the back.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/firing-of-atlanta-officer-who-shot-rayshard-brooks-reversed/ar-BB1go5Ln?li=BBnb7Kz

---

[The Magistrate]

1. So Fire Him Again, Fellas

It could get boring, but keep it up till he quits or the board shows some sense.

[Calista241]

5. He's already going to sue the city and make bank.

You can't just violate union rules, even if we don't like these unions.

[Ilsa]

2. Give him his due process, which was more than Brooks got,

then fire him again.

[Xoan]

3. Obviously Mr Rolfes due process was more important that Mr Brooks.

[Polybius]

4. Has this gone to a trial year?

I haven't heard anything in almost a year.

[Calista241]

6. No, it hasn't.

Mainly because nobody wants to try and take this to court. The prosecutor that announced the charges lost his re-election (and who many believe announced the charges for political reasons). The same, now unemployed prosecutor filed assault charges against the other cop that was on-scene, who never drew his service weapon, and was diagnosed with a concussion after being beat up by Brooks.

The local DA shouldn't even be prosecuting the case. The cop has probably shown up in court on behalf of that DA's office dozens of times. That's a real conflict of interest. You cannot have prosecutors prosecuting someone they know and / or have worked with. The real prosecuting authority should be the state DOJ, and they have shown no interest in moving forward the case. The report by the GBI on the shooting was completed in October but hasn't been released yet.

[flying_wahini]

7. Take any monetary settlements out of the Police union /retirement funds.

This crap would dry up overnight. They would police themselves if they they thought they All would have to pay for citizens wrongful shootings.

[MichMan]

8. Why should the union be responsible for one of their members fired illegally?

[Calista241]

9. Essentially all retirement funds, from anywhere, are shielded from seizure by lawsuit.

Whether it's an IRA, 401k, Roth IRA, Union funds, whatever.

If you want to make all union retirement funds assets that can be seized, be my guest, but I won't be supporting you. There's no legal way you could single out police unions from all other unions. And do we want to open up teachers, fire fighters, or other union members to this kind of civil lawsuit.

If we did this kind of thing, what we'd have is substantially less police, and less police willing to do actual police work. I'd rather cops show up and prevent crime, rather than coming by a few hours later to set up a crime scene investigation and write a report about it. If you want to go back to crime levels last seen in the 80's, then make your case for it, but you'd better welcome the election losses that come with it.