- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,001
- Reaction score
- 63,992
- Points
- 148
Rufus Tate JR discussed the report with the local new agency. so far it hasn't been refuted.
"In the police report you have so far, there is no description of a threat he received. So we have a real problem with that. But this has been a national discussion for the past two years. There is this perception that a black man is automatically feared," Tate said.
the report may be revised later but for now. the lawyer has concerns because the officers did not state why he was in fear for his safety. nothing in the report outlines a reason for fear.
There has been no information provided on Radio chatter. despite DJ absolving the officer for that reason.
There has been no indication that the gun was a factor.. one would believe the shooting officer would of put that tidbit in his initial report.
there was more than just the two officers on the scene at the time the shooting officer arrived.
What is clear is that officer who was shot. complied to officer orders to get on the ground and that the officers told him to get back up and it has been reported he had his service revolver but its not indicated where it was or if the shooting officer had seen it.
and it has been reported the shooting officer saw the man detained and released although apparently he didn't understand or see that the man had been released by his peers who were closer to the situation.
Who is "Rufus Tate Jr.?"
Because if he happens to be the attorney for the guy that got shot, you'd think he'd be much more categorical than saying something weaselly like "there is no description of a threat he received", because nobody is claiming he "received" a threat. The argument is that he saw a guy with a gun advancing on police.
I mean, you'd think the attorney would say "there is no mention in that police report that he saw my client had a gun", if that was in fact true. Curiously, though, he didn't say that....
On a side not, this is like the sixth time you've quoted a Complaint or a lawyer's claim as evidence of underlying truth. I've yet to read a Complaint in any case that didn't make it sound like the defendant wasn't worse than ol' Adolph himself.
Last edited: