Support Atlanta Police Officer Rolfe’s Family

Community

  • $1,771

    Pledged of $100,000 Goal

  • 36

    Backers

  • 0

    Days Left

Share this campaign

Help raise awareness for this campaign by sharing this widget. Simply paste the following HTML code most places on the web.

Embed Code

<iframe src="https://officerdown.us/?ig_embed_widget=1&product_no=495" width="214" height="366" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" /></iframe>

Regardless of the outcome of the investigation and prosecution, the family of this officer will be suffering in silence during the process and does not deserve to be dragged into it.  There are also bills to pay. The family should be supported as they are the unintended victims here.   

Officer Rolfe
“Officer Rolfe was involved in the justified shooting of Rayshard Brooks on June 12th, 2020. The videos clearly show that the shooting was justified; however, the District Attorney Paul Howard, who is losing his election, has chosen to charge Officer Rolfe with 11 charges including Felony Murder, and it is 100% for political gain. The DA is losing his election, and he is also under investigation himself for stealing $185,000 in tax money, and transferring it directly into his personal account.
This fundraiser is designed to help Officer Rolfe and his family to pay for legal services and general necessities.

Officer Rolfe Was Involved In The Justified Shooting Of Rayshard Brooks On June 12th, 2020, And He Is Being Used As A Political Pawn By The District Attorney And Has Been Charged With Murder.
This fundraiser is designed to help Officer Rolfe and his family to pay for legal services and general necessities.“

Quoted from Georgia Law Enforcement Organization page

Funds will be sent to Officer Rolf's family or to Georgia Law Enforcement Organization

Project FAQ
Full Incident Breakdown
"APD SHOOTING EXPLAINED
Before reading below, remember that officers are afforded the same constitutional rights as citizens, so whether they’re charged for political reasons or not, the facts of the case remain the same until their day in court:

In order to understand this situation, you’ve got to set feelings and emotions aside to understand objective reasonableness.

So looking at this case, what do we know?

A DUI investigation determined that he was too intoxicated to drive. The bodycam showed the officers being overly nice and polite to him the entire time all the way up until the handcuffs were about to go on, as they should’ve been.

As soon as they tried to cuff him, an all out brawl took place. Not just resisting, but punching them in the face and throwing them around.

He took one officer’s taser, threw him face first into the asphalt, stood up, and took off.
_____________
So let’s pause there and see where we’re at legally.

Charges:
DUI
Obstruction X2 - Felony
Battery on an officer X2
Aggravated assault X2 - Felony
Strong Armed Robbery - Felony
And believe it or not....
Possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime - Felony

Per Georgia Law, a taser is classified as a “less-lethal” FIREARM as they do occasionally cause death.
(OCGA 16-11-106)
________________
These offenses are important because there is a case law called Tennessee v Garner

What Tennessee v Garner states is:
“When a non-violent felon is ordered to stop and submit to police, ignoring that order does not give rise to a reasonable good-faith belief that the use of deadly force is necessary, UNLESS it has been threatened.”

So this goes back to the taser being classified as a firearm that can cause death or great bodily harm.
___________
So,
They fought
He stole the taser
He got up and ran

The 2nd officer chased after him and tried to use his own taser against him, but he didn’t get a good connection.

Brooks then turns, aims the taser at the officer, and fires. Statutorily, this is no different than firing a gun.

(The taser that APD carries has 2 cartridges, so Brooks could have potentially shot the officer twice.)

The officer dropped his taser from his left hand after it appears he was hit by a barb on the video, draws his sidearm, fires 3 shots, falls against a car in the parking lot and Brooks goes down.

Brooks was not only a continuing threat to the officer since he could still fire the taser again, but he also showed and EXTREME desire to get away, with a weapon. So it is not unreasonable to have the fear that he would use that weapon to carjack a motorist sitting in the drive-thru line, take a hostage, or otherwise hurt another innocent party.

What does Georgia Law say about deadly force?
OCGA 17-4-20 (b):
Sheriffs and peace officers may use deadly force:
1.) to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon. (He did)
2.) to apprehend a suspected felon who possesses any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury. (He did)
3.) to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others (He did)
4.) to apprehend a suspected felon when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm (He did)

The officer only needed one of those requirements, but he had all 4........

Now the reason taser’s are considered “less-lethal” is because when used appropriately, you are “less likely” to kill someone vs using a gun. But Brooks hasn’t been through the training to know how to avoid certain vulnerable parts of the body, and he doesn’t understand how neuromuscular incapacitation (NMI) works, which makes it MORE likely for him to cause great bodily injury or death than if an officer used it.

And just to support the fact that tasers can and do kill, there is an East Point Officer currently sitting in prison for improperly using a taser and killing a man a few years ago.
(Eberhart v Georgia)

“He could’ve shot him in the leg!”

Right off the top, it is unconstitutional to do so. It is considered cruel and unusual punishment to employ a gun in that manner. Either an officer felt deadly force was necessary, or he should use a lesser response.

We could just leave it at that, but that's too much of a cop out, so let's discuss WHY it has been deemed unconstitutional. For one thing, that's an extremely difficult shot to make. The target is quite narrow, and in continuous motion as the suspect runs away/charges the officer. Under the best of conditions trying to hit the leg is challenging...to be generous about it. But in a life or death encounter, the officer's fine motor skills will be eroded by the stress of the encounter making the shot, turning a leg shot into a very low probability feat.

Assuming a round does hit the leg, then what? The only way a shot to the leg would immediately stop a threat is by shattering one of the bones, and stopping the threat is the ultimate goal. While it is very difficult to find a shot to the leg that will immediately stop a threat, it is actually comparatively easy to find shots to the leg which eventually prove fatal. Human legs have very large blood vessels which are essentially unprotected (femoral artery)

Now remember, we’ve had days to sit back, watch videos, discuss, and analyze this entire thing. The officers had less than a minute from the time the fight started, and less than 5 seconds to interpret EVERYTHING you just read while running, getting shot at with a taser, and returning fire.

-Greg James
Founder/Executive Director
Georgia Law Enforcement Organization"

Updates

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Project FAQ

Full Incident Breakdown
"APD SHOOTING EXPLAINED
Before reading below, remember that officers are afforded the same constitutional rights as citizens, so whether they’re charged for political reasons or not, the facts of the case remain the same until their day in court:

In order to understand this situation, you’ve got to set feelings and emotions aside to understand objective reasonableness.

So looking at this case, what do we know?

A DUI investigation determined that he was too intoxicated to drive. The bodycam showed the officers being overly nice and polite to him the entire time all the way up until the handcuffs were about to go on, as they should’ve been.

As soon as they tried to cuff him, an all out brawl took place. Not just resisting, but punching them in the face and throwing them around.

He took one officer’s taser, threw him face first into the asphalt, stood up, and took off.
_____________
So let’s pause there and see where we’re at legally.

Charges:
DUI
Obstruction X2 - Felony
Battery on an officer X2
Aggravated assault X2 - Felony
Strong Armed Robbery - Felony
And believe it or not....
Possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime - Felony

Per Georgia Law, a taser is classified as a “less-lethal” FIREARM as they do occasionally cause death.
(OCGA 16-11-106)
________________
These offenses are important because there is a case law called Tennessee v Garner

What Tennessee v Garner states is:
“When a non-violent felon is ordered to stop and submit to police, ignoring that order does not give rise to a reasonable good-faith belief that the use of deadly force is necessary, UNLESS it has been threatened.”

So this goes back to the taser being classified as a firearm that can cause death or great bodily harm.
___________
So,
They fought
He stole the taser
He got up and ran

The 2nd officer chased after him and tried to use his own taser against him, but he didn’t get a good connection.

Brooks then turns, aims the taser at the officer, and fires. Statutorily, this is no different than firing a gun.

(The taser that APD carries has 2 cartridges, so Brooks could have potentially shot the officer twice.)

The officer dropped his taser from his left hand after it appears he was hit by a barb on the video, draws his sidearm, fires 3 shots, falls against a car in the parking lot and Brooks goes down.

Brooks was not only a continuing threat to the officer since he could still fire the taser again, but he also showed and EXTREME desire to get away, with a weapon. So it is not unreasonable to have the fear that he would use that weapon to carjack a motorist sitting in the drive-thru line, take a hostage, or otherwise hurt another innocent party.

What does Georgia Law say about deadly force?
OCGA 17-4-20 (b):
Sheriffs and peace officers may use deadly force:
1.) to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon. (He did)
2.) to apprehend a suspected felon who possesses any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury. (He did)
3.) to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others (He did)
4.) to apprehend a suspected felon when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm (He did)

The officer only needed one of those requirements, but he had all 4........

Now the reason taser’s are considered “less-lethal” is because when used appropriately, you are “less likely” to kill someone vs using a gun. But Brooks hasn’t been through the training to know how to avoid certain vulnerable parts of the body, and he doesn’t understand how neuromuscular incapacitation (NMI) works, which makes it MORE likely for him to cause great bodily injury or death than if an officer used it.

And just to support the fact that tasers can and do kill, there is an East Point Officer currently sitting in prison for improperly using a taser and killing a man a few years ago.
(Eberhart v Georgia)

“He could’ve shot him in the leg!”

Right off the top, it is unconstitutional to do so. It is considered cruel and unusual punishment to employ a gun in that manner. Either an officer felt deadly force was necessary, or he should use a lesser response.

We could just leave it at that, but that's too much of a cop out, so let's discuss WHY it has been deemed unconstitutional. For one thing, that's an extremely difficult shot to make. The target is quite narrow, and in continuous motion as the suspect runs away/charges the officer. Under the best of conditions trying to hit the leg is challenging...to be generous about it. But in a life or death encounter, the officer's fine motor skills will be eroded by the stress of the encounter making the shot, turning a leg shot into a very low probability feat.

Assuming a round does hit the leg, then what? The only way a shot to the leg would immediately stop a threat is by shattering one of the bones, and stopping the threat is the ultimate goal. While it is very difficult to find a shot to the leg that will immediately stop a threat, it is actually comparatively easy to find shots to the leg which eventually prove fatal. Human legs have very large blood vessels which are essentially unprotected (femoral artery)

Now remember, we’ve had days to sit back, watch videos, discuss, and analyze this entire thing. The officers had less than a minute from the time the fight started, and less than 5 seconds to interpret EVERYTHING you just read while running, getting shot at with a taser, and returning fire.

-Greg James
Founder/Executive Director
Georgia Law Enforcement Organization"