Deaths of Floyd, Brooks not the same

Three weeks later, I still can’t clear the image of a blue knee squeezing the breath out of George Floyd.

I wish I could put what happened to Floyd in a box labeled “isolated incident.” But that’s not possible because Floyd’s death is a dot in an unbroken line of similar incidents.

We’ve reached the point where we need to set aside tortured explanations that seek to absolve police. We must acknowledge the obvious – some cops treat African Americans much worse than white people.

From the horrifying flashpoint of Floyd’s killing came weeks of cops punching, gassing and shooting peaceful protesters and journalists. Then, a week ago, a white Atlanta police officer shot and killed a Black man in a Wendy’s parking lot after an altercation. It took less than 48 hours for the wildfire of racism allegations to spread, for Atlanta’s mayor to fire the officer, for the police chief to resign, and for the hamburger restaurant to be destroyed by fire.

I empathize with the frustration and fury accompanying every “breaking news” bulletin that includes a white law enforcement officer and a dead African American. Decades of unjustified police shootings trigger an expectation that today’s is just like yesterday’s – and both are going to be covered with the walls of institutional privilege that often work to bury police misconduct while ignoring the African American bodies that are literally buried in its service.

I genuinely get it. But not every white officer who shoots an African American man is motivated by racism, and not every police shooting is a crime.

Facts matter. Here are the facts leading up to the Atlanta shooting:

Last Friday night, a Wendy’s employee called 911 to say a man appeared drunk and asleep behind the wheel of his car in the drive-thru.

Atlanta police responded, knocked on the window of Rayshard Brooks’ car, and asked him whether he was all right.

During a conversation with Brooks, he denied being in the Wendy’s drivethru though one of the officers talked to him there moments earlier.

Suspecting he was under the influence of alcohol, the officer performed field sobriety tests, including a breathalyzer. Brooks was drunk.

The officer told Brooks he was too intoxicated to drive and asked him to put his hands behind his back so he could be taken into custody for driving under the influence.

Brooks pulled away and started fighting the officers, managing to throw both of them off him.

Brooks grabbed a Taser from one of the officers and ran. The other officer tried to stop Brooks with his Taser but a chase ensued.

While running, Brooks turned and pointed the stolen Taser at the officer. He then shot the Taser at the officer.

The officer then shot Brooks.

That a man died is tragic. But the protests, celebrity outcry and general media capitulation that equates Brooks’ death with that of George Floyd, and countless other African Americans who were murdered at the hands of flagrant police misconduct, is wrong.

In a headline reminiscent of the National Enquirer, the Los Angeles Times ran an editorial Tuesday titled: “Atlanta police killed a Black man for being drunk at Wendy’s.” No. Mr. Brooks was not killed for being drunk.

Rayshard Brooks was killed after resisting arrest, attacking two police officers, taking an officer’s Taser and shooting it at a police officer. The decision by the Times’ editorial board to intentionally omit this last fact is damning proof of its effort to create a narrative that serves a social agenda, despite evidence that supports a contrary conclusion.

Atlanta’s district attorney, Paul Howard, announced felony murder charges Wednesday against the officer who shot Brooks.

American Bar Association rules prohibit prosecutors from making pretrial statements that could influence public perception and prejudice an accused’s ability to get a fair trial. Howard violated this rule by making a lengthy presentation of evidence that supported his position and ignored key facts that did not.

A new and disturbing allegation presented by the district attorney is that the officer kicked Brooks after he was shot. Though acts after an event can be considered reflective of an earlier intent, the pivotal actions in this case will focus on what happened in the seconds before the shooting.

In Georgia, an officer is entitled to use deadly force when he reasonably believes his life is in danger or he’s at risk of receiving a serious physical injury. When this case goes to trial, the jurors will be instructed to consider the context of Brooks attacking the officer, grabbing the Taser and fiirng the Taser at the officer. This analysis includes the possibility that if Brooks hit the officer with the stolen Taser, he could grab the officer’s gun and shoot him.

Brooks was shot immediately after attempting to tase the officer. Despite Wednesday’s charges, a dispassionate analysis of the evidence raises serious questions about whether the state can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that, in that split second of chaos and instinct, the officer did not fear for his safety.

And to every home detective, journalist and pundit with a Twitter account, please stop suggesting the officer is guilty of murder because he did not “call an Uber” for a drunken driver. Having consoled many families whose loved ones were killed by drunken drivers, I don’t want the police putting drunken drivers in an Uber and sending them on their way.

And I can’t help but think that the same people calling for the officer’s blood today would be the first to call for his firing tomorrow if he had let Brooks go and Brooks got into another car and killed a family on their way home from dinner.