1. Cops put themselves in harms way all the time. It's part of the job

2. He did not unload his "clip". It was 4-5 rounds from what I've read. The weapon holds 16 rounds.

3. I don't care what that attorney said on AM radio, it was all fair for the publics opinion of the deputy to be tainted and lies to be spewed as facts from her friends. So excuse me if I don't see an issue with character witness'.

 

Yes and cops make boneheaded decisions to try and stop a moving vehicle by jumping on the hood. Can we agree on this?

You must be confused, she was actually the perpetrator. Perpetrators are the people who commit the crimes, victims are the ones effected by it. Deputy Brockman didn't commit a crime, he did his job and got to go home to his family. He now has to live with this incident for the rest of his life but that's also not his fault.

You hit the nail on the head. He lives. The 19-year-old girl is dead. Only one victim here. That's the way I see it. Just a dead girl and a scarred-for-life survivor wearing a badge. Very, very sad.

Can you explain what was said in the 'Character assassination"? If the assassination included the FACTS that she was high and drunk, then that is not a character assassination.

 

Anything and everything about that girl should not even come into play when the DA was determining whether or not to indict the cop. PERIOD

 

Whether she was drunk, high, had a past conviction, etc....that was all crap the cop didnt know when he made his decision to act.

 

That is what I understood by listening to the ATTORNEY Lisa Wells.

You hit the nail on the head. He lives. The 19-year-old girl is dead. Only one victim here. That's the way I see it. Just a dead girl and a scarred-for-life survivor wearing a badge. Very, very sad.

 

And you're wrong. He's a victim.

Yes and cops make boneheaded decisions to try and stop a moving vehicle by jumping on the hood. Can we agree on this?

 

I've never heard of cops doing this. Hell I've never seen it on Cops before even. You'd be in the minority in believing a police officer is going to jump on a moving vehicle to try and stop it. They don't get paid enough for that. This isn't the NFL where officers get a bonus after X amount of hood hops. That's about how serious I can take what you're suggesting right now.

Anything and everything about that girl should not even come into play when the DA was determining whether or not to indict the cop. PERIOD

 

Whether she was drunk, high, had a past conviction, etc....that was all crap the cop didnt know when he made his decision to act.

 

That is what I understood by listening to the ATTORNEY Lisa Wells.

 

So in your opinion, only fact that should've been introduced was the cop was on her hood and shot her? No matter the other FACTS? Wow, one sided much. That's just stupid. All facts should be introduced.

You hit the nail on the head. He lives. The 19-year-old girl is dead. Only one victim here. That's the way I see it. Just a dead girl and a scarred-for-life survivor wearing a badge. Very, very sad.

 

And you're wrong. He's a victim.

 

Yea what Rocket said.

You're kidding, right? It was okay for Brockman's reputation and character to be slandered and spit on, but not the girl who put both of them in that position?

 

His character being spit on had nothing to do with the DA's decision to indict or not. Can we all clearly understand this? Just like her character or speculation shouldnt have been used in determining it. However, it was. Hence the reason he didnt get indicted.

 

Jeeeesh

Yes and cops make boneheaded decisions to try and stop a moving vehicle by jumping on the hood. Can we agree on this?

 

We're playing chess and you're playing checkers here. You aren't making sense and all your doing is looking at the once small piece of the incident in vacuum.

His character being spit on had nothing to do with the DA's decision to indict or not. Can we all clearly understand this? Just like her character or speculation shouldnt have been used in determining it. However, it was. Hence the reason he didnt get indicted.

 

Jeeeesh

 

So you think he should've been indicted? On what grounds?

And you're wrong. He's a victim.

Obviously, we disagree.

So in your opinion, only fact that should've been introduced was the cop was on her hood and shot her? No matter the other FACTS? Wow, one sided much. That's just stupid. All facts should be introduced.

 

You really can't win with this crowd. Last night someone took issue with officers not recognizing that drunk/high people may not act rationally. I mean there truly is no way to reason with some people, they simply don't get it.

Maybe I missed it but how does this attorney know what was presented to the grand jury? It's always been my understanding that the records are sealed.

 

Apparently the DA went into it with the intent of proving Tyler did no wrong instead of doing his job and looking at the facts of the case as they were presented at the time he made the decision to fire on her. This was verbally stated according to Lisa Wells and that is what she had an issue with. She by no means was on one side or the other, she was speaking as a professional attorney and what should have happened.

 

She also said that he unloaded the clip in her so unless someone shows me proof he didnt I will go by what she stated because she wouldnt say that on a 700 WLW broadcast unless she was privy to the information.

We're playing chess and you're playing checkers here. You aren't making sense and all your doing is looking at the once small piece of the incident in vacuum.

 

And all you are doing is sticking to your guns.

Obviously, we disagree.

 

Yep, and you're still wrong. Everyone is upset cause it was teen female. If it was Joe-crap the Ragman, 40 year old, unemployed guy with prior DUI's, none of you would care. You gotta look at the facts of the incident and her as just a suspect. Leave age, race, gender out of it. The same folks banging the drum saying she was just a teen female are the folks who are all against "profiling". Hypocrites.