Then the government indicted 61 activists on RICO charges: https://apnews.com/article/atlanta-cop-city-protests-rico-ch...
This is currently ongoing.
I mean, thanks for the link I guess, but I'd say this sentence leaves out some very important details. Namely, that the cops are claiming that this person shot and seriously wounded a cop first.
To be clear, your linked article explains how it's not really clear yet what the sequence of events were, or if the person actually shot a cop. But I'd put it like this:
1. If the person did shoot the cop first, I have no problems with the other cops opening fire.
2. If the person did not shoot the cop first, then the cops should face severe legal charges.
Since the facts on the ground are not yet known, I'll withhold judgment.
I'm not arguing it's as easy as proving it for a civilian (after all, as part of their job cops are allowed to use force under particular circumstances), but these black-and-white statements like "They should but they won’t" just show to me how uninterested people are listening to anything that may change their opinion.
That you posted this shows a lack of interest by you to look into the other perspective, and that you’d rather be pedantic and dismissive than acknowledge their viewpoint.
Sorry, not going to let that BS slide. I was referring to a comment that said "With the existence of qualified immunity, American cops are immune to #2. They should but they won’t." It's not "being pedantic" to point out that comment makes absolutely no sense, given (a) qualified immunity isn't even relevant in criminal cases, and (b) they are making a blanket statement with no concern for the actual facts of the situation.
The protestor had a gun on him. The model and serial number matched that of a gun he purchased in 2020. The round recovered from the state trooper’s abdomen matched that gun.
The cops traced it back to Teran and went into the protest encounter expecting to be dealing with a cop killer.
Kid had no idea what was coming; APD are thugs an environment that self-selects for them. They took no chances and wasted him.
Covering up a summary execution is way easier than conspiracy to commit it.
The family claims friendly fire. I'd believe it. Accidental discharge would explain why no GSR was found on his hands.
Firearms forensics is, like most criminal forensics, junk science[1]: even when the basic scientific reality is aligned any particular technique, it's heavily laundered through interpretation and not subject to rigorous statistical analysis.
(In particular, bullet analysis is complete nonsense. Prior to 2005 the standard technique was lead-composition analysis, which (1) assumed that all of the suspect's bullets were the same, and (2) assumed that similarly-manufactured bullets would have similar compositions. Neither is true, which is why the Federal government no longer uses it as evidence. It's unclear whether the same is true for Georgia and the GBI.)
Edit: A more specific reference for ballistic analysis[2], which appears to be what the GBI used here.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_firearm_examination#C...
[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X2...
> Gunpowder residue is not seen on the hands. A GSR kit is performed," the report reads in part.
> That GSR kit was sent off to the GBI Crime Lab for analysis. The findings were released Tuesday. This report "revealed the presence of particles characteristic of gunshot primer residue."
The autopsy did not find visible residue. That is quite different from your conclusion "the autopsy found there wasn't gunpowder on their hands".
1 - https://www.ajc.com/news/gbi-report-particles-characteristic...
2 - https://www.allsides.com/news-source/atlanta-journal-constit...
Cox Enterprises is ringing extremely loud warning bells. This is the same Cox that is time and again accused of being an internet and TV monopoly and taking advantage of their customers with exploitative, borderline illegal tactics. I don't trust them one bit. I'm willing to bet in a place like Atlanta, with the history it has, there's still a good ol' boys club with deep roots, operating as the Chamber of Commerce or another faceless, buried, quasi-bureaucratic market-capture and -manipulation mechanism. It's such a mundane point to make because of how ubiquitous this pattern is, but bears repeating in this context. It always seems paranoid to point out this possibility until it's proven true. You can see a recent expression of this tendency in the raid on that elderly reporter in Kansas, the one that stressed her out so much she died.
Again, critical reading is imperative here. Especially considering how news media outlets today frequently rely on "access journalism" -- ie, favorable coverage and language in exchange for voluntary participation by police in accessing details about new stories -- we should expect that large outlets (especially ones with captive audiences such as "the only major daily newspaper in the metropolitan area of Atlanta, Georgia"; looks like they monopolized Atlanta's newspaper market, too) play games with rhetoric to maintain legitimacy while peppering in propaganda, in the name of "both sides" and "neutrality", in order to maintain access.
You shouldn't trust that 'allsides' website any more than you should trust anyone else. I certainly don't. You should also note: "As of September 2023, AllSides has low or initial confidence in our Lean left rating for Atlanta Journal-Constitution." This does not support your assertion that this media source is "left-biased". In fact upon further review that website relies exclusively on community reviews to label these websites. It has the same issues that any reporting mechanism of this form has, which makes it even less trustworthy.
ACJ is playing to their crowd just like the rest of them to maintain legitimacy and keep the money flowing. This isn't to say that everything in the news is fake, just that everything in the news is shaped by material forces working behind the scenes which helps to form the narratives that end up in the columns and webpages. Sometimes there's outright lies, sometimes lies by omission. It's as much about what is said as what isn't said. Sometimes even emphasis and rhetoric is enough to shift the narrative enough that certain perspectives are completely memory-holed.
Indeed.
If you don't trust that the multiple media outlets have managed to copy and paste quotes correctly, then go to the original source reports and draw your conclusions.
I get that it's inconvenient for one side in the standoff for gunshot residue to be found on their hands. I don't have any reasonable double that there was.
Plenty of experts on primer residue and other forensics topics out there. "Is it possible that this amount of residue is due to the bullets shot at and into Tortuguita and not due to shots fired from a weapon held by him? Do you find it credible that wounds such as those through the palms of Tortuguita coincide with the narrative that he was wielding a gun at the time of his death?" Easy peasy, and I didn't even go to school for journalism. I'm sure there's other means of finding credible information. They could also quote those other activists who were witness to the death and put those quotes on equal footing with those from the police, but they don't.
> I don't have any reasonable double [sic] that there was.
Assuming you meant "doubt": then you're playing a one-sided game while scolding others for what you perceive is one-sidedness. To me it is hypocritical to do so.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/st-louis-officer-execut...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds6g-QyAxbw
https://abcnews.go.com/US/baltimore-officers-planted-gun-man...
> Today, the GBI received confirmation from a firearms transaction record that in September 2020, Manuel Esteban Paez Teran legally purchased the firearm that was used in the shooting of a GSP trooper.
> The handgun is described as a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 9mm. Forensic ballistic analysis has confirmed that the projectile recovered from the trooper’s wound matches Teran’s handgun
1. https://gbi.georgia.gov/press-releases/2023-04-14/gbi-invest...
Super. Believable.
/s
https://radleybalko.substack.com/p/devil-in-the-grooves-the-...
"Both Manuel's left and right hands show exit wounds in both palms. The autopsy further reveals that Manuel was most probably in a seated position, cross-legged when killed,"
Also, he was shot a dozen times, and apparently had raised both his arms.
Neat trick getting shot through both palms while holding a gun (without damaging the gun), kind of like bashing your own head in from the back of a squad car, or hanging yourself from a 9 ft jail cell ceiling without a rope or platform.
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/11/1162843992/cop-city-atlanta-a...
Thanks for the link.
If you get shot 57 times, including through your head, you're probably going to drop what you're holding at some point during the experience.
Even if he had it with him...
Even if he had just shot a cop with it...
It does not justify murdering him for it, especially since from what I've seen, when he was shot he had surrendered and was no threat to anyone.
We really need to stop letting cops control the narrative around their extrajudicial killings by putting blame on the victim. It doesn't matter if the victim is a pure choirboy or the worst, most hard-bitten gang member you can find: lethal force should be the absolute last resort when attempting to subdue someone.
https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/autopsy-cop-city-protester-...
Autopsy: Gunshot residue ‘not seen’ on activist killed at police training center
https://www.ajc.com/news/crime/activist-killed-at-police-tra...
"According to the autopsy sent to ABC News, Teran did not have gunpowder residue on their hands. Officials claimed Teran fired the first shot at a state trooper."
https://web.archive.org/web/20230419235728/https://abcnews.g...
I’m not sure how well visual inspection would work with all the blood and other carnage.
However, I’m also not sure if trace gunshot residue will show up on current forensics tests if multiple people empty their clips into you from a few feet away.
There’s also the question of why they shot him over a dozen times while he was unarmed.
This is like a drug trial that reports deaths and neglects that people died in a car accident.
Yale should be more responsible and work harder to have accurate reports if they want people to use their reports.
Why do you think Yale even included the incident that the parent commenter was referring to?
A handgun registered to the activist was found at the scene and ballistics from the bullet that struck the officer matches that gun.
Later, the crime lab reported finding gun shot residue on the activist’s hands.
I think those 3 things together combined with ample witness testimony would typically be considered proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The initial crime lab report showed no gun shot residue, and the forensics imply the police lied about the incident. Witnesses testimony is contradictory.
In my opinion, there’s no reasonable doubt that the police murdered him, execution-style. There is reasonable doubt that he shot the officer.
The initial report was only a visual inspection. When you do a more sensitive test, you get more accurate results. There is nothing sinister about this sequence of events.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Manuel_Esteban_Pa...
Aside from the cops' testimony there seems to be 0 evidence supporting that Tortuguita shot at them.
In other words: the accused are investigating themselves, and have produced a report that suggests that they were justified in killing a climate activist. I think that's a pattern we'd normally treat with extreme skepticism; it's unclear that GBI has earned an exception to that.
(It hopefully isn't controversial to say that, as a general principle, entities in positions of exceptional public trust or interest should not be tasked with enforcing or regulating themselves.)
What is the role of a state level investigation bureau if not to investigate state-level issues involving state agencies?
However, to answer the following (which isn't what I meant, but I think is interesting):
> but assuming it’s a private firm would you not have the same criticism that it’s not a neutral third party and is biased towards whoever hired them?
I think the answer to this is similar to the answer found in arbitration: arbitration is typically performed by a well-known firm, and that firm is obligated through contract to perform fair proceedings. In other words: there are civil penalties on the table if the independent party does not execute their job fairly.
That being said, I think an unrelated but still governmental investigation arm would be sufficient here.
> What is the role of a state level investigation bureau if not to investigate state-level issues involving state agencies?
You can find the GBI's services listed here[2]. They have a lot of responsibilities, most of which aren't tied to investigation of local police. I think it'd even be fair to say that they aren't particularly equipped to investigate local forces.
Good news then, the State DA recused and GBI is a different agency than the state police.
No; the Georgia State Patrol is the primary agency that was involved. It's a different agency.
https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/autopsy-cop-city-protester-...
The amount and pattern of GSR deposited may vary by the gun used to fire the bullet. Most GSR emanates from the ejection port of a semiautomatic pistol. GSR is expelled from the gap between cylinder and frame of a revolver. There is greater particle number with revolvers than with automatic rifles. Particle numbers are greater with nonjacketed bullets, mainly due to an increase in particles composed of lead. A faster burning rate of propellant powder reduces the distance of GSR particles travelled. (Blakey et al, 2018) (Vachon and Martinez, 2019)
GSR may be expelled from the firearm ahead of the bullet, along with the bullet, and following after the bullet. Though the amount of residue deposited tends to decrease with increasing range of fire, the actual deposits can be highly variable for ranges up to 20 cm.(Brown, Cauchi, et al, 1999) GSR has been reported to be found at distances from 6 to 18 meters forward of the shooter, and up to 6 meters laterally. However, climatic conditions significantly influence recovery rates for GSR. (Dalby et al, 2010) Use of atomic force microscopy (AFM) for detection of particle size in relation to range of fire has been described. (Mou, Lakadwar, and Rabalais, 2008)
Would hardly be the first time, just a random sample from the last 5 years:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds6g-QyAxbw
https://apnews.com/article/gun-violence-crime-baltimore-82fa...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/st-louis-officer-execut...
https://nypost.com/2020/01/03/nypd-cop-caught-planting-stun-...
'While the official autopsy report states “gunpowder residue is not seen” on Teran’s hands, it is not conclusive because gunpowder is not always visible to the naked eye. A gunshot residue kit was performed, but those results have not been returned from the GBI Crime Lab, the medical examiner’s office told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.'
Those results were later released. They were positive.
I shoot handguns on a monthly basis. Anecdotally, I have to do a lot of shooting before I have visible residue on my hands.
We are releasing a photo of the handgun that was in Manuel Esteban Paez Teran’s possession when a Georgia State Patrol trooper was shot on January 18 at the site of the future Atlanta Public Safety Training Center. The handgun is described as a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 9mm. Forensic ballistic analysis has confirmed that the projectile recovered from the trooper’s wound matches Teran’s handgun. Other preliminary information released in this case is consistent with the investigation so far.
https://gbi.georgia.gov/press-releases/2023-04-14/gbi-invest...
The bullet they found in a cop's stomach matching the gun he owned is evidence that he used it, albeit not unimpeachable proof because matching bullets to guns is a matter you can reasonably question. Nevertheless, I think the sum of the evidence thus-far presented supports the narrative that he shot a cop then the cops turned him into swiss cheese, possibly with the man trying in vane to surrender while that was happening.
Either way, he surrendered to the police with both hands empty, and was shot a dozen times. Then the police officers that were involved lied in the report.
The remaining will have had their lives turned upside down by the process, and despite being innocent, will have suffered immense damage financially by the state.