Atlanta Prosecutor Sues DOJ For Blocking Investigation Of Incident Where Cops Shot A Man 59 Times

Wow, this guy had to really piss someone off to deserve such an overwhelming response. An interesting story nonetheless and it appears the DOJ doesn't want to talk about it.

Want Congress to do something right for once? Enforce transparency.

www.techdirt.com...< br />

A case that involves some shocking numbers has resulted in a lawsuit against the DOJ. An investigation into a raid that ended with law enforcement officers putting 59 bullets into the body of an Atlanta resident has dead-ended and it appears to be because the DOJ doesn't want to talk about it.

This FOIA lawsuit is only part of the federal government's problems. The family of Jamarion Robinson has also sued the officers involved in the shooting, which includes the US Marshals Service. This lawsuit appears to be on hold at the moment as everyone suing over the shooting attempts to obtain documents related to Robinson's killing.

14 law enforcement officers from eight separate local municipal police departments, along with at least one United States Marshal, traveled to the Parkside Camp Creek Luxury Apartments in Atlanta, Georgia to execute a State of Georgia arrest warrant for Jamarion Robinson (hereinafter “Mr. Robinson”). The state arrest warrant alleged that Mr. Robinson committed an aggravated assault in violation of Georgia Code Annotated 16-5-21, a state crime. Mr. Robinson was not charged with any federal crime, and there was not a federal arrest warrant pending for Mr. Robinson.

The officers knocked down the door to the apartment and immediately commenced firing approximately 51 shots from outside into the apartment without any known provocation and with reckless disregard for the safety of anyone else in the apartment and surrounding apartment units.

The officers then entered the apartment and fired approximately 41 additional shots from weapons, including a 9mm submachine gun, a .40mm submachine gun, and a .40 Glock pistol.

The DA's lawsuit notes Robinson's only legal problem up to this point was a traffic violation.

After officers fired more than 90 bullets into Robinson's apartment, some claimed Robinson fired at them first. But statements made by other officers and the results of the ensuing search punch holes in this narrative.

US Marshals task force accused of excessive force and cover up
www.13wmaz.com...

"It is my objective to make sure that everyone knows what happened to my son, Jamarion Robinson."

Robinson also shared that a forensic pathologist that worked in her son's case revealed that Jamarion had been shot several times in both his right and left palms.

"So you tell me, how a person is holding a weapon."

Hmm...a guy is shot so many times he could be used as a pencil and the "proper authorities" don't want to discuss it. Sounds incredibly familiar. I'm sure the "proper authorities" would never lie or cover up malfeasance and...ohh hey, Beyoncé has a new song! Shiny!


*snort*

There is a small part of the story here that I see you've left out.

They were searching for this guy because he opened fire earlier on police officers.

All witness statements agree that Mr. Robinson was ordered to drop his weapon.


To sum up -

Shot at a police.

Refused to drop the weapon he was pointing at responding officers.

Died of natural causes.

I'll wait for you to post a picture of him from elementary school....

Christ all mighty, Osama Bin Laden didn't even get that many shots fired at him! Was this a raid or target practice?

a reply to: abe froman

And, since ATS loves it some eyewitness accounts, the manager of the apartment complex saying it was a full blown shootout, not a one sided shooting.

Kind of makes a person wonder if he thought someone else was breaking into his apartment and was holding a gun when they came in. If I had someone breaking into my apartment like that, I would go grab my gun. Did the police knock and say who they were before bashing in the door? How does a person know if someone breaking in is really a cop in a situation like that, I would put the gun down once I saw their uniforms but not before if I were living in a big city.

originally posted by: rickymouse
Kind of makes a person wonder if he thought someone else was breaking into his apartment and was holding a gun when they came in. If I had someone breaking into my apartment like that, I would go grab my gun. Did the police knock and say who they were before bashing in the door? How does a person know if someone breaking in is really a cop in a situation like that, I would put the gun down once I saw their uniforms but not before if I were living in a big city.

If I had shot at police and then someone came knocking my door down, I'm pretty sure I'd have a firm grasp on who it was and why.

a reply to: abe froman

I think the real question is why is the DOJ stonewalling if it is such an open and shut case.

a reply to: infolurker

The DOJ has declined to turn over the personnel and training records of all involved officers.

I don't see this as stonewalling, without a court order, I wouldn't expect them to anyway.

Sounds more like being disinclined to fuel a witch hunt.

I'll bet good money the Atlanta D.A. is preparing to run for office on an identity politics based platform.

I urge everyone to read the source article.

Especially the part where they shoehorn in a reason to blame Trump.

That should tell you everything you need to know about this story.

Read the article. All that was said about Mr Trump was a mention of a visit. That's not shoehorning blame, that's, you know, basic reporting. But hey, if want to blame him, I suppose there is a correlation between the installation of the Trump regime and rapidly-crumbling race relations in this country. Just how I see it, YMMV.

a reply to: IanForge

Not even remotely sure what you read or are referring to.

Six hundred days of DOJ stonewalling roughly aligns with the agency's reshuffled priorities following Trump's presidential win. The incoming AG (Jeff Sessions) yanked funding from the DOJ's civil rights department and said the agency would no longer be investigating the actions of local law enforcement.

I don't see any mention of a visit at all, but I do see a "the stonewalling started when Trump took office" statement.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Sorry, meant "win", not visit. Point is, blame is being shoehorned onto AG Sessions, not Mr Trump.

a reply to: IanForge

"How can you be so obtuse? Is it intentional?"

originally posted by: abe froman
a reply to: IanForge

"How can you be so obtuse? Is it intentional?"

I ask this of those who mindlessly follow Mr trump daily. So far I've gotten memes, insults, two invitations to hades and enough poor grammar to make Jack Douglas giddy, but no actual logical reasons. I hope you'll be the first to break that, and I mean that sincerely.

one article claims he was shot 76 times and the other claims 59 times. I suppose it could be a difficult task to determine the exact number with that many rounds involved, but seems at least a consensus could be formed so the press doesnt appear stupid as usual. That does seem to be an excessive number of rounds either way.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I'm not too familiar with police officers using full automatic weapons other than SWAT teams. There aren't many fully auto 9mms besides the MP-5 which tells me that SWAT was likely involved and that this man was not some poor victim that was forced into being a criminal due to white oppression. If there is a problem here, it's that the police haven't moved to .45acp for better stopping power.

originally posted by: abe froman

originally posted by: rickymouse
Kind of makes a person wonder if he thought someone else was breaking into his apartment and was holding a gun when they came in. If I had someone breaking into my apartment like that, I would go grab my gun. Did the police knock and say who they were before bashing in the door? How does a person know if someone breaking in is really a cop in a situation like that, I would put the gun down once I saw their uniforms but not before if I were living in a big city.

If I had shot at police and then someone came knocking my door down, I'm pretty sure I'd have a firm grasp on who it was and why.

According to the last sentence of the article displayed in the OP, it appears that the guy may have not shot at the police when they came in. Evidently there are discrepancies in the way some of the cops gave statements and also evidence at the scene does not back up that the guy shot first. It is the word of some cops who shot that is being questioned. Sometimes someone can just accidently discharge their weapon and all the cops shoot.

I did not read the whole article, just what he had presented. I know what can happen, cops break down wrong doors often, even around here, and they will subdue anyone, even seventy year old people if they are in the house. They did that in a bust up here, wrong house, the old people sued and won.

Not to make light of this case, but this sounds like an episode of the X-Files or Night Stalker.

They call in every armed law enforcement officer from the US Marshall's Service to the local school crossing guard to kill one man.

[Puts on tinfoil hat] Maybe he was just really hard to kill...

-dex

I don't take sides in these situations, since information on the ground versus after the fact hindsight is a very different situation.

That aside, I'm sure we can all agree this, no human needed to die over this confrontation.