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

 

I am not saying that at all....What I am saying is the DA went into it looking to get Tyler off instead of doing his job. PERIOD

And all you are doing is sticking to your guns.

 

Yup, grand jury got it right. Period.

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

 

No he didn't get indicted because he didn't break the law, he only tried to enforce it. The deceased is gone because she did break the law multiple times including an assault of an officer with her vehicle. Those are the reasons he didn't get indicted.

My take on the last few pages of posts.

 

1) Officer Brockman is a victim in this case.

2) Samantha Ramsey is a perpetrator in this case. For those that disagree ask yourself this: Would she have been charged and most likely in jail had she lived? I think yes on the grounds of DUI, assault of an officer, disobeying a police order, fleeing and evading, and other charges.

3) The fact that she was drunk and high most definitely should've been presented to the grand jury. It corroborates Deputy Brockman's side of the story in which he stated she appeared intoxicated (she was) and was ignoring his request for her to stop.

4) I don't think cops make the decision to jump on the hood of a car for no reason. Now I can see them making that decision if they've been hit by the car and possibly are about to be run over (which is what the reports say Deputy Brockman was facing).

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.

 

You saw the video didnt you. He was on the side of the vehicle, his foot was obviously run over by her car. He got angry I am sure just as anyone would but he decided to jump on the hood ordering her to stop....then unloaded on her. You dont get your foot run over and then get hit head on causing you to be on the hood. Is that what you actually think happened?

I am not saying that at all....What I am saying is the DA went into it looking to get Tyler off instead of doing his job. PERIOD

 

Maybe she did do her job by seeing that he didn't do anything wrong? Just cause an attorney "wins" doesn't mean they are doing their job. The DA clearly has common sense. Which you seem to lack. DAs decline to prosecute citizens every day for a multitude of reasons, lack of evidence, criteria not met for a charge, etc. Just cause she doesn't seek to get indictments regardless of the facts, doesn't mean she's doing her job.

You saw the video didnt you. He was on the side of the vehicle, his foot was obviously run over by her car. He got *Word Filter Violation - Edit Your Post**Word Filter Violation - Edit Your Post**Word Filter Violation - Edit Your Post**Word Filter Violation - Edit Your Post**Word Filter Violation - Edit Your Post**Word Filter Violation - Edit Your Post* and jumped on the hood ordering her to stop....then unloaded on her. You dont get your foot run over and then get hit head on causing you to be on the hood. Is that what you actually think happened?

 

Past your first 2 sentences, is ALL your speculation. Fact. So unless you were in the car, you know nothing.

Yup, grand jury got it right. Period.

 

Yup, thanks to the added character assessment of the young girl as well as the DA's influence. It happens, they protect their own.

You saw the video didnt you. He was on the side of the vehicle, his foot was obviously run over by her car. He got upset and jumped on the hood ordering her to stop....then unloaded on her. You dont get your foot run over and then get hit head on causing you to be on the hood. Is that what you actually think happened?

 

And you don't know what happened when they went off the screen. Do you know that he didn't end up in front of the car while trying to back away from her? Because if you were there and saw that (which it sounds like you were since you keep stating "he got mad and jumped on the hood" as if it were fact), you should've alerted the prosecutor and told him your side of the story.

 

And every report I've seen says he fired 4 shots. Not 16 which is what unloading the clip would be.

It doesnt matter....she is dead and he is alive and off the hook. Keep dancing Rocket.

I am not saying that at all....What I am saying is the DA went into it looking to get Tyler off instead of doing his job. PERIOD

 

Once again, this is your opinion. Did she tell you she was going in to get him off? I'm fairly certain that the DA was seen as bad news for Tyler when it was changed because the DA was seen as someone who was relentless.

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.

 

If you want proof just look for it. Claiming ignorance doesn't make you right, it just means your basing your opinion on bad information. You can see the photos of the windshield on channel 9. A 40 caliber Glock does not hold 4 bullets, that's how many holes were in the windshield.

 

Getting your information from one (possibly biased) source isn't doing yourself any favors.

It doesnt matter....she is dead and he is alive and off the hook. Keep dancing Rocket.

 

Because he did nothing wrong. I'm glad we don't purposefully try to prosecute innocent people just for the sake of public opinion.

And you don't know what happened when they went off the screen. Do you know that he didn't end up in front of the car while trying to back away from her? Because if you were there and saw that (which it sounds like you were since you keep stating "he got mad and jumped on the hood" as if it were fact), you should've alerted the prosecutor and told him your side of the story.

 

And every report I've seen says he fired 4 shots. Not 16 which is what unloading the clip would be.

 

No I wasnt there but you dont know when he got on that hood either. It could have been right after he got his foot run over or you are right it could have been at a different point. I am going with he got angry she continued to try and leave and his foot was run over. Drunk or not, I am not buying he ran in front of the car and ordered her to stop and she hit him. Sorry...just not.

 

Just because the gun holds 16 bullets doesnt mean all 16 were in the clip. Maybe he only had 4 shots left. I am sure that is a simple question to have answered though.

 

Look people, I am not against Tyler Brockman....I am just making a few comments regarding how the decision to indict or not went down.

It doesnt matter....she is dead and he is alive and off the hook. Keep dancing Rocket.

 

Who's dancing? She put the wheels in motion that night. If you can't see that, then you're blind. It's tragic, but there's consequences to poor decisions. Had she stopped when he told her to or after she injured him, she'd have gone to jail but would be alive.