https://reason.com/2020/06/15/was-the-shooting-of-rayshard-brooks-lawful-but-awful/
Even a nice video frame capture showing him facing away from the cop as the cop had his gun drawn to shoot.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/us/rayshard-brooks-atlanta-shooting-monday/index.html
The fact that Brooks did not have a deadly weapon is important, CNN law enforcement analyst Charles Ramsey said. Early in the encounter, an officer asked Brooks if he could pat him down, and Brooks agreed.
"Now you know he's not in possession of a firearm or any other deadly weapon," said Ramsey, a former Philadelphia police commissioner.
Once you fire the Taser, it has to recycle before it can be used again," he said. "I would doubt very seriously if most citizens would even know how to operate a Taser."
So instead of shooting Brooks, Ramsey said the officer could have continued the foot pursuit, "get on a radio and call for some assistance."
"You've got the car. You've asked for his driver's license. You know who he is. So even if you don't get him right now, you can get him later," Ramsey said.
"The need to immediately apprehend is taken away. And you can only use deadly force under certain, very narrow circumstances," such as if the officer's life or anyone else's life is in danger, or if the person being pursued poses a serious danger to the public.
"That's not the case here," Ramsey said.
Edited by TigerMatt at 00:43:26 on 06/16/20