Shooting of jogger in GA

[JDD]

The letter was 'obtained' by the New York Times, which generally means it was leaked. It's an internal memo not a public statement.

This was the second recusal, not the first. The language seems to suggest that it's written the way it is because:

'Given the Governor's current shelter in place order and Justice Meltons Judicial Emergency
Order; I can not venture a guess as to when they will move on this request, and once another is
found; when that District Attorney willhave the staff available to review this casefile. I hope
for all involved it will move along as quickly as possible.

After talking by telephone with you yesterday , I appreciate there is immediate pressure on your
department as to the issue of Arrest. Since I have already given you an initial opinion the day
after the shooting, I feel I can still comment on this limited issue.'

Also, at the bottom
'As to any further issues on whether to present this to a Glynn County Grand jury, that will have
to wait for the next District Attorneys review . Please consider this an OPEN file until that
decision is made and restrict the release of any information under Georgia Open Records
Act requests.'

I think we are coming at this issue from the same side? There is way too much material from the investigation floating around right now, most of which would have had to have been leaked. As an aside, it does not necessarily speak well to the professionalism of an office when internal materials and evidence keep appearing in public.

Perhaps I worded it poorly, but the letter reads as a having his cake and eating it too thing. The paragraphs you quoted which, for the most part seem very appropriate. The one that is concerning is the: I gave you my views already, but now I have to pass the case on because there is too much perception of bias associated with my views - but before we do that, let me state my views again for the record. I have no idea how their internal processes work, perhaps that is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, but in the public sphere it is very different - and that is where the letter is now.

From what I understand, that the first DA recused because the shooter had worked for her, while the second had to recuse because his son works(ed) for the first DA; possibly a co-worker of the shooter? - either way, less direct but still cozy. It would be interesting to compare the recusal letters from the first and second DA, although I suspect it would be best all around if the djinns were both packed back into the bottle and none of this material was floating around.

[HCountyGuy]

Is trespassing on a construction site a felony or a misdemeanor in GA? I think that will make a difference regarding how reasonable these actions were.

Criminal Trespass in Georgia is a misdemeanor.

[Hideeho]

A few points to consider, maybe include in a thread regarding arrests by civilians.

1. Is the arrest worth killing for?

2. Is the arrest worth dying for?

A mistake some people make when initiating action is presuming their action will produce intended results. Call that "getting in at the ground floor". Starting at the bottom of possible escalation can cause tunnel vision regarding other outcomes. Instead, start at the top floor, ask yourself do I want to kill that person or get killed? Make that decision first, before acting.

[RevolverRob]

I've talked about this before - I know we're going to talk about it again - Even though it shouldn't matter - IT DOES MATTER -

OPTICS

The way a situation is perceived by the public matters. Ultimately, the justice system works for the people.

In this case -

Three white males followed/chased a lone black male.

Two white males cut a lone black male who was running in the street off in an attempt to force/coerce/'effect a citizen's arrest'.

Two armed white males did this to an apparent unarmed black male, with no clear markings indicating they were police, whether they had legal authority or not is virtually irrelevant at this point.

Two district attorneys have recused themselves from the case. First, because of possible family connections, second because of possible third party connections.

__

All of these things look bad for the defendants.

__

The good news:

A third district attorney has done the responsible thing and asked for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation to investigate this, allowing for a regionally independent investigation to occur. If you've spent any time living in the south OR in a rural area, you know as well as I do that local investigations are viewed as circumspect and frankly, this is precisely what should occur. Hopefully at the conclusion of this we'll have a more definitive understanding and set of prosecutorial recommendations.

[DocGKR]

I am a bit confused. I watched the video. I read the DA letter.

Is walking through a construction site mere trespassing or a felony in GA?

It seems the purported detention attempt was for burglary; did the decedent have any stolen property on him at the time of his death or was any dropped as he ran?

Did the decedent commit any felony justifying a detention attempt by civilians?

[MickAK]

I think we are coming at this issue from the same side? There is way too much material from the investigation floating around right now, most of which would have had to have been leaked. As an aside, it does not necessarily speak well to the professionalism of an office when internal materials and evidence keep appearing in public.

Perhaps I worded it poorly, but the letter reads as a having his cake and eating it too thing. The paragraphs you quoted which, for the most part seem very appropriate. The one that is concerning is the: I gave you my views already, but now I have to pass the case on because there is too much perception of bias associated with my views - but before we do that, let me state my views again for the record. I have no idea how their internal processes work, perhaps that is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, but in the public sphere it is very different - and that is where the letter is now.

From what I understand, that the first DA recused because the shooter had worked for her, while the second had to recuse because his son works(ed) for the first DA; possibly a co-worker of the shooter? - either way, less direct but still cozy. It would be interesting to compare the recusal letters from the first and second DA, although I suspect it would be best all around if the djinns were both packed back into the bottle and none of this material was floating around.

I think so too. I quoted what I did because I think his motivation for writing the letter the way he did was under the circumstances he felt it would be a long time before another DA's office had the time and manpower to pursue this, that he understood the Captain was under pressure by the family to make an arrest, and that although he disagreed that a recusal was needed it was a potential hot potato and he wanted his reasons for kicking it down the road clear. I doubt the letter says anything he didn't say on the phone, he just wanted a record of it which is useful sometimes. Probably regrets it now though.

[Totem Polar]

On the subject of "coal rolling," one tactic that has reportedly yielded mother loads of schadenfreude: in order to produce the lung-coating levels of black smoke with which assaholic drivers engage in plaguing cyclists and joggers, the trucks have to be modified, with the removal/disabling of some sort of secondary burn emissions tech—using aftermarket "tuning" kits. While there often isn’t much that can be done criminally to the roller for the act itself after the fact, a license plate can yield a surprise inspection from the state EPA dude who enforces these things, and if evidence of tampering with the OEM parts is found, a fine can be issued for that fact alone. It’s been a while since I followed the topic, but my memory is that the fine really jumped out at me as non-trivial—maybe 25k?

So, yahoo tunes his lifted shit wagon, and rolls on a cyclist, who gets the plate. Yahoo then later gets to either dig deep into savings (maybe), or start selling off shit—often including the shit lift truck in question (most likely). Sounds like a beautiful thing to me.

One more random thought—from a musician, not a legal scholar, mind—long guns, unless ensconced on property under one’s control, are largely "going looking for trouble" tools, in civvy life. I am talking tactics and optics here, not legality. The DA letter notes that long arm OC is legal, but it was a shitty choice from a pragmatic viewpoint, as it both looks bad, and may have escalated the situation.

JMO, OMMV, etc.

[Rex G]

Reading this reminded me of one of my recent quick-walks. At the turn-around point, I elected to take a break, as I was starting to over-heat*, and stepped away from the street, into a publicly-owned grassy area, and took some pictures. Yes, some people consider photography to be a suspicious activity. Plus, I was not wearing a mask. Exercising is one of the listed exceptions, during this COVID thing.

A person, driving a pickup truck, slowed as he approached, and was visually evaluating me, as he passed. It took him some time to resume his speed. Had he stopped, in my path, and then tried to detain me, it could have been an interesting moment. Would he have been trying to rob me, or, “detain” me for suspicious photography, or for not wearing an anti-viral face covering? What am I supposed to think?

When he kept going, it became a moot point. Thankfully.

FWIW, I have a northern European complexion, and he had a medium/dark brown complexion.

Just sayin’.

*I am intentionally fully-clothed, including long sleeves and hat, during these fast walks, so that I build my tolerance for hot weather, as Spring moves toward Summer. And, because sunscreen is messy stuff.

[BehindBlueI's]

I would in no way make that assumption.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd_Jr.

Hardly. Two males kidnapping a child or a woman, or a minority to that neighborhood, odds are thats going to end very very badly.
Also a reminder: Georgia.

I can only assume you didn't read all my posts or chose to ignore them. See post #104 which should address both of those concerns.

If someone was confronted trespassing/burgling and then started running then no.

I'd be real careful about the trespassing part. Trespass is typically a misdemeanor only.

Everyone, do yourselves a favor and don't post anymore until you read this letter. It contains actual facts and a summary of the evidence.

I read it. Having been involved in this sort of thing before, that's not how internal only communication normally goes. I think if this wasn't written for official public release it was at very least written with an eye for a "leak", personally. I also get that prosecutors/district attorneys are politicians. Arguing that we don't know who pulled the trigger because they were fighting over the gun while the alleged shooter had his finger on the trigger, for example, makes me suspect he's not exactly a neutral party. Referencing prior mental health issues are also politics. The decision to shoot or not is based only on what the shooter knew at the time, so unless they know each other it's a side show.

Now that's not to say his version isn't correct, mind you. Just let's not pretend it's agenda free and that it's gospel any more then the media account is at this point.

[Gater]

On the subject of "coal rolling," one tactic that has reportedly yielded mother loads of schadenfreude: in order to produce the lung-coating levels of black smoke with which assaholic drivers engage in plaguing cyclists and joggers, the trucks have to be modified, with the removal/disabling of some sort of secondary burn emissions tech—using aftermarket "tuning" kits. While there often isn’t much that can be done criminally to the roller for the act itself after the fact, a license plate can yield a surprise inspection from the state EPA dude who enforces these things, and if evidence of tampering with the OEM parts is found, a fine can be issued for that fact alone. It’s been a while since I followed the topic, but my memory is that the fine really jumped out at me as non-trivial—maybe 25k?

So, yahoo tunes his lifted shit wagon, and rolls on a cyclist, who gets the plate. Yahoo then later gets to either dig deep into savings (maybe), or start selling off shit—often including the shit lift truck in question (most likely). Sounds like a beautiful thing to me.

One more random thought—from a musician, not a legal scholar, mind—long guns, unless ensconced on property under one’s control, are largely "going looking for trouble" tools, in civvy life. I am talking tactics and optics here, not legality. The DA letter notes that long arm OC is legal, but it was a shitty choice from a pragmatic viewpoint, as it both looks bad, and may have escalated the situation.

JMO, OMMV, etc.

Not to distract from the subject at hand, but this reminds me of a “win” mentioned here. See post 5 in this thread. Well done, sir!

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....493&viewfull=1