GBI Continues Lavonia Pastor Death Probe

Atticus Finch wrote:

On the video, you can see that they shoot Mr. Ayers as he is driving away. Despite any graininess, there is no uncertainty about which two individuals shot Rev. Ayers, or that they shot him as he was driving away from both of them when they killed him. That is all that is needed for a murder charge, and that charge should have been filed as soon as the video was recovered. Some cases are difficult. This is not one of them because the video shows them shooting at Rev. Ayers as he is driving AWAY.
By the way, the video also shows that Rev. Ayers was attempting to back up before any police officers got out of the Escalade. The officer who ran behind Rev. Ayers' car knew full well that Mr. Ayers had no way of knowing that he was a policeman because Rev. Ayers was not only IN his car before the first policeman ran up behind his vehicle, but rather was already DRIVING his car before the first policeman ran up behind his vehicle. Rev. Ayers was clearly justified in trying to drive away and the police knew he was justified.
They just thought that no one would care about their little game because the driver was a drug user. They got a little more than the bargained for when it turned out the driver was not a drug user. However, what they deserve to get are murder convictions and death penalties (one apiece).

You're missing the point of my post, dummy. How is it you can clearly see that in this video, but YOU cannot see the officer CLEARLY being run over by a perp in a much clearer video??? The you went and accused that officer of committing a felony! You committed libel when the proof was clear as day!! You've proven yourself to be a biased, prejudiced, lying fool with an agenda.

What would be great is to remember we live in America. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This story "and video" has more questions than answers. Thats why the GBI is investigating it. The officers either did nothing wrong or did something wrong. Bashing them online is wrong. And while using a screen name is cowardly. Its easy to run your mouth when you think no one will know its you. Lets refrain from bashing and wait for the investigation to be concluded. Thats what should be done ,not this crap about the officers being murderers. Thats just absurd and childish.

kenstepp wrote:

What would be great is to remember we live in America. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This story "and video" has more questions than answers. Thats why the GBI is investigating it. The officers either did nothing wrong or did something wrong. Bashing them online is wrong. And while using a screen name is cowardly. Its easy to run your mouth when you think no one will know its you. Lets refrain from bashing and wait for the investigation to be concluded....

Up North we have a saying: "people in glass houses should not throw stones."

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/dacula-ga/TJ8...

Atticus hoists the Stepp-ster by his own petard! Gotta love it!

Atticus Finch wrote:

<quoted text>
Up North we have a saying: "people in glass houses should not throw stones."
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/dacula-ga/TJ8...
Atticus hoists the Stepp-ster by his own petard! Gotta love it!

Interesting. If you look around you will also find that I was a victim of over a million dollar theft. Three police officers and An assistant district attorney's daughter. One went to prison (my general manager) and the rest was covered up. You will also see in my story that my windows were broken out of my home and I had death threats from these people. You can also find online that I do not scare easily, maybe never. One officer has been arrested 6 times for drugs ,etc ,another is not a cop anymore ,and one is a Lawrenceville Detective still. But even someone thats been through that knows that my thieving officers were not the norm. The officers that sign up to protect and serve are the norm. They deserve the benefit of the doubt. The same benefit of the doubt the Constitution gives us all freely. The difference is you and I didn't have to earn this right ,and they earn it every day. Sorry Ati I fail to see your point. And if you want to know something about me just ask.

The point is that you were assuming the suspects in that thread were guilty in advance of their trial and bashing them online. Then you pretend to not understand how that applies here in this thread. You got burned, d00d. Just admit it.

Atticus Finch wrote:

The point is that you were assuming the suspects in that thread were guilty in advance of their trial and bashing them online. Then you pretend to not understand how that applies here in this thread. You got burned, d00d. Just admit it.

Sorry but thats not anywhere in the vicinity to what happened to me. They were caught red handed and my case is still in federal hands along with a bunch of other cases against them. So I have no reason to do anything right now. In my case there was a paper trail ,bankers ID'd them ,caught selling my property online, and over 20 witnesses in all. So yes I was the person that lost and yes I know who did it. That takes a lot of the "wonder if they did it" out of my case. It still doesn't speak to this case in any way. You weren't there I was there in my case. You looked at a grainy film but know nothing else about the evidence. I have seen "all" the evidence in my case. I am a professional investigator and you are a cowardly little fellow that runs your mouth under the protection of a fake name. Its very different. I'm also not calling them anything other than thieves. That will be the charge given to them. You on the other hand are calling them murderers. That will never be the legal charge that IF they are found to have made a mistake they will never be charged with. At worst these officers did something they did not mean too. My officers planned what they did to me. If you can't see the difference then I can't make it any more clear for you. I hide behind nothing. If I say something then someone knows its me. Its what real men do. Your everything other than that.

And I'm not assuming the suspects in this thread are guilty of anything. Have you bothered reading my posts before you ran your mouth you'd know that. This has to be terrible for the Ayers family. Mr Ayers freaked out and tried to run away from the police. Thats evident even in the video. Witnesses said they identified themselves as police officers. Its aweful all the way around. My point is to let the investigation go through. The GBI is a great organization and are honest. They are controlled by central offices and beholdend to no other agencies ,they are well trained and have a successful history of going after cops that mess up. The officers deserve far more respect than you are showing. They are not murderers ,at worst they messed up. Thats not murder. Let them finish their work and see what comes out. After you know what really happened you may have a different view of this case because you do not know enough about the case.

Atticus Finch wrote:

The point is that you were assuming the suspects in that thread were guilty in advance of their trial and bashing them online. Then you pretend to not understand how that applies here in this thread. You got burned, d00d. Just admit it.

YOU got burned when the video showed the officer getting run over by the perp!! Lines in the street PROVE the perp ran over the officer!! You're too stupid and stubborn to admit it though!!

Atticus Finch Factoid of the Day: Finchy loves REALLY crappy music. In fact, even calling it music is a bit of a stretch. Stay tuned for more!

Nobody wrote:

-{Complete Source and Text Credited From -(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Code_of_Sil... )-
The Blue Code of Silence -(or Blue Wall of Silence) is an unwritten rule among police officers in the United States not to report on another colleague's errors, misconducts or crimes. If questioned about an incident of misconduct involving another officer (e.g. during the course of an official inquiry), if following the Blue Code of Silence it would be standard procedure to claim ignorance.
Ironically, it is similar to the code of silence in organized crime, like the Omertà.
Studies demonstrate that most police feel that the code is applicable in cases of “illegal brutality or bending of the rules in order to protect colleagues from criminal proceedings”, but not to illegal actions with an “acquisitive motive”.[1][2]
Nevertheless, cases such as the Rampart Scandal demonstrate that blue code culture can sometimes extend to cover-ups of every level of crime, acquisitive or otherwise.

What a ridiculous notion! There is NO "Blue Code of Silence." I have been involved in law enforcement for 20 years and have arrested and testified against numerous officers who decided to move over to the wrong side of the law. There is nothing that an honest cop hates worse than a dirty cop. We have sworn to uphold the law and to protect the people from criminal activity, and that's what we do!

I'm glad that this case is going before the grand jury and that people outside of the county are reviewing the evidence. I feel that the tape does show Mr. Ayers attempting to flee and run over the officers, and that, as such, they legally had the right to fire their weapons. However, I think judgement is always a factor. A different officer may have just jumped out of the way rather than firing.

My sympathies are with the Ayers' family, but I've seen some really bad behavior from a lot of their "Christian" friends and church members. It's really THEM that want the facts of the case covered up. They want the officers prosecuted as criminals with no thought as to what the law actually says.

Even if Ayers knew they were police (and the vid makes it pretty clear that he had no way of knowing), it is still murder because the officers fired when he was driving away from them and not when he was driving toward them. In other words, the threat to the officers was terminated (by Ayers himself) before they shot him. This is what makes so clear the fact that this particular killing happens to be murder. the officer's right to shoot in self defense stopped when the threat stopped, and there was no threat to them when they shot Rev. Ayers.

DUB wrote:

<quoted text> I did, and she is.

it also might just be obvious that sage and dub have a gender problem.

FALSE wrote:

<quoted text>
What a ridiculous notion! There is NO "Blue Code of Silence." I have been involved in law enforcement for 20 years and have arrested and testified against numerous officers who decided to move over to the wrong side of the law. There is nothing that an honest cop hates worse than a dirty cop. We have sworn to uphold the law and to protect the people from criminal activity, and that's what we do!

lol you sir or mam have just made my day with your ridiculous notion theory, With the 20 years of law enforcement under your belt, then that code; if the same as any other code of silence, would remain very exclusive to people who are directly or indirectly involved in situations which would compromise a degree of integrity, I do belive there are honest and good police officers out there that do their job but there are some who when in a compromised position turn to the darker side of life and make sure those around them keep their mouths shut about it, the same way criminals might do in similar situations.. You sir or mam as a cop of 20 years should know this to be true, from either having to deal with crimials or from being around corruption... You know something?.. people break promises and creeds every day nomatter who they are ... its the extent to what is broken about them; and to what measures have been taken to fixed them before you can determine if someone is justifiable that doesnt mean innocent by any means but proven to be right through forgiveness or mercy of courts to accept a lesser sentence such as involentary manslaughter instead of murder, or even able to be rehabilitated if proven a degenerate... I truely hope others have those values. I dont know about you... I think the people in the wrong on this should be on their knees crying and begging God, the Judge and people who see them in the wrong on this for some mercy and forgiveness and then be a man about it after that and accept accountability.

Atticus Finch wrote:

Even if Ayers knew they were police (and the vid makes it pretty clear that he had no way of knowing), it is still murder because the officers fired when he was driving away from them and not when he was driving toward them. In other words, the threat to the officers was terminated (by Ayers himself) before they shot him. This is what makes so clear the fact that this particular killing happens to be murder. the officer's right to shoot in self defense stopped when the threat stopped, and there was no threat to them when they shot Rev. Ayers.

The law also allows for officers to use deadly force in the pursuit of fleeing felons that pose a danger to others. Before interpreting the law at least know what it says...

The fleeing felon becomes a lot more dangerous when he is, as Rev. Ayers was, shot in the liver. So that doesn't wash here.

Atticus Finch wrote:

The fleeing felon becomes a lot more dangerous when he is, as Rev. Ayers was, shot in the liver. So that doesn't wash here.

Are mental illnesses contagious??

Just wondering!

Oh, and would you object to me posting a picture of you here?? Not that I need your permission, since your pics are all over the internet and LEGALLY available for a link to be posted here. I was just wondering if you minded or not??

[QUOTE who="Jonathan Ayers' Widow Abby"]"I appreciate District Attorney Brian Rickman meeting and communicating with me and my attorneys over the past three months since the shooting death of my husband. I am deeply disappointed, however, to now learn that the usual practice in presenting cases to a grand jury will not be followed concerning the death of my husband. I understand that a first grand jury will be asked to consider the case and to give an advisory opinion on whether a second grand jury should be asked to receive evidence and decide whether to return any criminal indictments against the shooter and others responsible for Jonathan's death. I feel that this tilts the system unfairly in favor of those whose conduct led to this tragic and shocking loss of my husband and his family, including his unborn child that I am bearing. I intend to follow the law and all recourse available to me to see that justice is done, and that all those responsible for Jonathan's death are held accountable.[/QUOTE]

http://www.thenortheastgeorgian.com/articles/...

The DA is doing everything within the law.

Idiots who love perps, like Finchy, complain it's too easy for grand juries to indict people. Well, if it's so easy, there shouldn't be any complaints about the way this case is being handled. How do you honestly expect to get a CONVICTION, where the burden of proof is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, if you can't get two grand juries to say, "yeah, they PROBABLY did it??"

Of course, Finchy knows NOTHING of criminal law, so you would be a FOOL to listen to anything Finchy says. FYI, Finchy is a PATENT attorney.

Atticus Finch wrote:

Even if Ayers knew they were police (and the vid makes it pretty clear that he had no way of knowing), it is still murder because the officers fired when he was driving away from them and not when he was driving toward them. In other words, the threat to the officers was terminated (by Ayers himself) before they shot him. This is what makes so clear the fact that this particular killing happens to be murder. the officer's right to shoot in self defense stopped when the threat stopped, and there was no threat to them when they shot Rev. Ayers.

You are incorrect. He struck one officer with the car and was driving toward the second officer. Everyone who has looked at this case in a professional capacity has stated that the car was a lethal weapon directed at officers. They were within their legal right to use lethal force in response. By the way, the video you see on the news isn't the actual video recorded by the store. Reporters used their cameras to record the recording, which makes for a grainy, unclear picture.

The Sage version 2 wrote:

The DA is doing everything within the law.
Idiots who love perps, like Finchy, complain it's too easy for grand juries to indict people. Well, if it's so easy, there shouldn't be any complaints about the way this case is being handled. How do you honestly expect to get a CONVICTION, where the burden of proof is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, if you can't get two grand juries to say, "yeah, they PROBABLY did it??"
Of course, Finchy knows NOTHING of criminal law, so you would be a FOOL to listen to anything Finchy says. FYI, Finchy is a PATENT attorney.

I agree that there shouldn't be any complaints about the way this case is being handled. Getting the true facts of the investigation to a jury of 16 ordinary citizens who get to ask all the questions they want of each witness, is an excellent way to dispel the myths and rumors that the press has put out there to the public. No one can make the false "cover up" claim, when all of the cards have been laid on the table and a representative sample from the public can make a recommendation.